EPTWhy do people HATE Brood War when they first join? - Page 8
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
| ||
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
| ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
The reason many people hate BW when they first try it is not just because of the toxic lower ladder levels (you find this in just about every competitive game). The reason is they are stepping into a game far beyond all current competitive games. Its the same reason why a great many people don't do music seriously because its ridiculously difficult and time-consuming to reach the bottom of the top rankings. The same exists for several (not all) sports. If its really hard to do and therefore requires not just talent, but a well-backed decision of "I want to be the best at this and go as far as I can" which for some reason a lot of people these days refuse to do or find the prospect unappealing. You have to thrive on nearly-impossible challenge to enjoy BW and other high-skill art/physical forms. Your "fun" has to be in seeing minute improvements and by practicing hours and hours every day for months/years just to see a tiny tick in your ranking. If you aren't the kind of person that gets a real kick out of beating extra-challenging (not "stupid" challenging) activities, you will never be right for BW. Its just not for those kinds of people. Then again, nothing hard or really worth doing is. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
attack animations I see no problem with them they have good style and are not too flashy so the screen is always has good readability. With no sound you can get lost (less after enough time spent playing the game), but it's not recommended to play without sound, you will always lose information. + yeah about the AI in general its really not bad the few bugs that do happen you should be able to quickly get around them if you have good multitasking/micro like sCCrooked said, outside of these few bugs the AI/pathing/mechanics are great they make for a tactical game of great depth | ||
|
Jealous
10166 Posts
On December 27 2015 03:50 EatingBomber wrote: In addition, I do agree that the attack animations are bad; I play video games with sound off, so I can't really see whether my units were attacking or being attacked. Zealots, when attacking, simply do a jiggle with their arms, Marines don't distinctly hold up their rifle and start shooting, and there is no flash from the guns, and I really can't tell what Medics are doing, and it doesn't help when all my Marines are dead and they just run around in circles -_-. Also, some aspects are just sheer bullshit; when I expend so much effort sneaking 2 shuttles to do 2 Reaver drops, amongst other things, I expect to get at a minimum 2 SCVs, and not have the scarab get stuck between the minerals WTF I am going to tell you the same thing I told the other guy: Get good. You know how I know you have no clue what you're talking about? Same VOD I posted earlier. Look at that specific timestamp that I linked above. What do we see there? 1. When the Marine fires, there is flashing lights coming out of the nozzle of his gun. 2. When the Marine fires, there are bullets hitting the Assimilator; this will be true for any unit hit by a Marine, and it actually stacks, meaning you can tell if only one Marine is attacking an enemy unit or multiple. I don't remember how many stacks there are but there are probably at least 3-4 different levels to tell you how many Marines are attacking what. 3. When the Marine fires, his gun is tilted forward away from the Marine at an upwards angle! When the Marine walks, his gun is against his body. You can see all of this in the first 5 seconds of the video I posted above, at that time stamp. I could do this for every unit in the game but I trust that I don't have to. I will add that Medic + Marine micro is pretty hard; Medics end up healing each other, Medics can't stim so they move slower than Marines, etc. But, there is a methodology to their use that garners results like these: Look at how he prepares himself to go bust this monster wall of Sunkens. It might not be clear 100% what he is doing, but I'm sure if you search on forums there will be plenty of guides to Marine Medic usage, which you can read and try to incorporate into your play. Or, you can make baseless claims about a game and proffer complaints that can be translated into "I don't know how to control my units and I never spent any time trying to figure out why, so I gave up." By the way, Medics have a Heal animation, and their hands light up too. When you tell Medics to A-move, they heal anything in that direction. If two Medics are damaged and they are not in the vicinity of Marines, they will stall and heal each other. The solution to this is to tell them to move regularly to where the Marines are, and when they are integrated into the Marine army they will be more likely to heal Marines than they would be if they were standing a screen away making out and healing each other on their lonesome. Moving on... The Scarab complaint is so overused and so myopic. First of all, if every Scarab hit every clump of workers that it ever targeted on, it would be the most ridiculous unit in the game (not that it isn't strong already). Let's look at an alternate universe, where Scarabs hit 100%. I'm talking about SC2:BW. In this alternate universe, Reavers are straight up overpowered. There is no excuse for a Protoss not to go Reavers in any match-up; while Reavers are viable, to an extent and at certain stages of the game, against all races in BW, they are straight up STRONG against all races in SC2:BW. I played against a D level Protoss in SC2:BW as Terran. I even made Turrets. It doesn't matter though, because even if he loses the Shuttle and drops only 1 Reaver, it's worth it, because in 2 shots he will kill at least 10 SCVs, and if I run them away it might actually make it worse because they stack even more when they are running. Now compare this to Brood War, where if you run your Probes/SCVs/Drones at the correct time and in the correct direction, you can avoid losing a single worker! How sick is that? THIS is what makes for a captivating game: skill-dependent variables. If Player 1 drops his Reaver and Player 2 noticed him coming in on his mini-map, then he can quickly jump to his base and select his peons and hustle them out of his base ASAP. Now, this isn't that easy in BW, because they bug out like idiots unless they are sent to mine somewhere else, so this takes awareness, finesse, and control. However this is a necessary consequence to their stacking to mine ability, so it's not a bug as much as it is a logical reaction to being told to go somewhere when you are standing with 5 other workers in the same damn spot. If you perform this rapid series of skill checks perfectly, you deserve to be rewarded for your skill. Meanwhile, Player 1 shouldn't be rewarded for just running in and dropping a Reaver. That is 4 actions, 7 if we want to assume he is good enough to target-fire a worker on the mineral line (select Shuttle, load Reaver, move Shuttle to location, unload Reaver + select Reaver, attack target, click worker). If we rewarded him blindly for doing this but didn't reward Player 2 who tried so hard to get his workers out of harm's way, that would be stupid. However, this is not all there is to this story... Player 1 is actually pretty damn good himself. He knows that if he lands his Reaver behind the mineral line, his Scarab will get stuck behind the mineral patches, which it rightly should. Why? Because it is a physical missile being impeded by surfaces which are crystalline, jagged, and not friction-less (why do so many SC2 players assume that a lack of friction is natural?). Also because he knows that the most direct path from Reaver to jackpot money-shot Terrible Terrible Damage explosion is a straight line. So, instead of dropping BEHIND the mineral line, he drops INSIDE of it. Now Player 2, if he didn't notice the shuttle coming in, has much less time to perform the sick series of movements necessary to save his workers, because Player 1 is right inside his fucking mineral line, right in his face, ready to reap the harvest. However, it seems that Player 2 is still pretty good and managed to shuffle his workers out of there in time for Player 1's drop in the mineral line to not do much damage. So, what does Player 1 do next time? Instead of coming into Player 2's base directly from his base in a predictable straight line to the mineral line, he comes in at a diagonal that places his Reaver between the mineral line and the ramp leading out of Player 2's base. This means that if Player 2 reacted like he did last time, and pulled his workers to his natural mineral line as soon as he spotted Player 1's shuttle, then Player 1 is now right in that Goldilocks zone where the Reaver drops as the workers slide past him, and if Player 1 is good enough to calculate the speed of the workers vs. the speed of his Reaver firing and the Scarab traveling, he can time it perfectly where he gets a serious money shot. However, Player 2 is aware of this timing, and manages to send his workers back to his main gas in time to avoid the Scarab shot, MOSTLY. He only loses a couple of workers upon arriving there. Exchange made. I could go on like this about hypothetical Reaver vs. worker micro scenarios for another 2 paragraphs, at least, increasing Player 1's and Player 2's skill until it's Bisu vs. Stork. I think I made my point, though. You have shown that you have no desire, or no capacity, to do basic problem-solving. Your complaint of "I drop my Reaver behind his mineral line and didn't get any kills, what gives? This game's pathing is stupid," simply demonstrates how wrong your mentality is in approaching and understanding this game. Instead of thinking "Oh, dropping it here doesn't work, what WOULD work?" you think "Dropping it here doesn't work, Reavers suck." Do you apply this mentality in real life too? I'm sure it will bring you much success. There was a game that is very pertinent to this, it was Stork vs. some upper-middle class pro, I believe it was MSL Ro4/8 or something? Basically they both went Reaver drop, and consistently Stork would get ~10 kills whereas the other Protoss wouldn't get jack shit. They both did the same build, but Stork's Reaver placement was akin to Player 1's in my description, whereas other pro was more like you. Guess who won that one, and guess why people remember Stork's name, and why Stork is one of the most successful Protoss of all time. Maybe you should be emulating Stork and not "Protoss who lost because of poor Reaver and Probe micro and decision making" #5246. TL;DR: Pay more attention to the game you are making false complaints about. All of these "faults" that you encounter are mere obstacles to be overcome with practice, not game-breaking bugs. Get good. | ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
On December 27 2015 03:50 EatingBomber wrote: In addition, I do agree that the attack animations are bad; I play video games with sound off, so I can't really see whether my units were attacking or being attacked. Zealots, when attacking, simply do a jiggle with their arms, Marines don't distinctly hold up their rifle and start shooting, and there is no flash from the guns, and I really can't tell what Medics are doing, and it doesn't help when all my Marines are dead and they just run around in circles -_-. Also, some aspects are just sheer bullshit; when I expend so much effort sneaking 2 shuttles to do 2 Reaver drops, amongst other things, I expect to get at a minimum 2 SCVs, and not have the scarab get stuck between the minerals WTF I have never had any problems with the animations. Even a a six year old, they were obvious to me. But I am not saying that you are lying. I just think it's weird. The reason your reaver drops fail is that you don't understand how scarabs work. Try to keep a clear path between your reaver and its target. I played against a D level Protoss in SC2:BW as Terran. I even made Turrets. It doesn't matter though, because even if he loses the Shuttle and drops only 1 Reaver, it's worth it, because in 2 shots he will kill at least 10 SCVs, and if I run them away it might actually make it worse because they stack even more when they are running. It's so much better that the reaver is the way it is. As Terran, I enjoy manipulating the scarab so that I don't lose SCV's. As a Protoss, I enjoy getting those good scarabs off because I had the foresight to place my reaver at the correct position (for example in between the main and the natural, so that the SCV's can not escape). It's much more fun that it can be avoided, that both players dance with each other, rather than what you are describing - simply suiciding in to the SCV's because once you reach them, you get guaranteed massive damage. A good reaver drop doesn't have to kill lots of SCV's. It's enough to make them run around, and therefore not mine minerals. A few vultures here and there, a tank or two, a few SCV's building turrets - stuff like that. That is all you need for a good reaver drop. Good Terrans will protect the area that you would ideally want to engage from - the area from which a scarab would always reach the SCV clumps. This means that the Protoss either instead lands in the less ideal area, from where the SCV's can run and evade the scarab - or goes for a risky suicide run, in to the guarded area, to get that epic scarab off. Personally, I usually go for units rather than SCV's. One scarab and a few dragoon shots will take out a tank. If the tanks are unsieged, you can snipe them from outside their vision. If they are sieged, you can drop your dragoon / zealots to soak up the shots, and then drop the reaver to shoot at them. You can also drop out of tank range to harass supply depots. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
personally, if it was up to me I would make a change like this to the scarab : let it go through units and move towards center of target, as soon as it collides with any ennemy unit, explode slightly smaller AoE because even if you can manipulate it and overcome its defects etc, there is still quite a bit of luck involved in how big of a hit you get / whether you get a hit at all, and I personally don't like that. Also I think when it gets really good hits it is sometimes too strong. just my opinion though, still like them reavers! | ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
On December 27 2015 06:02 ProMeTheus112 wrote: so people do disagree about the scarab being a little broken! personally, if it was up to me I would make a change like this to the scarab : let it go through units, as soon as it collides with a ennemy unit, explode smaller AoE because even if you can manipulate it and overcome its defects etc, there is still quite a bit of luck involved in how big of a hit you get / whether you get a hit at all, and I personally don't like that. Also I think when it gets really good hits it is sometimes too strong. just my opinion though, still like them reavers! if the reaver wad nerfed at all ZvP late game would be ridiculously op | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
On December 27 2015 06:02 ProMeTheus112 wrote: so people do disagree about the scarab being a little broken! personally, if it was up to me I would make a change like this to the scarab : let it go through units and move towards center of target, as soon as it collides with any ennemy unit, explode slightly smaller AoE because even if you can manipulate it and overcome its defects etc, there is still quite a bit of luck involved in how big of a hit you get / whether you get a hit at all, and I personally don't like that. Also I think when it gets really good hits it is sometimes too strong. just my opinion though, still like them reavers! It is not luck based. It seems luck based to you because you don't understand how it works. so people do disagree about the scarab being a little broken! personally, if it was up to me I would make a change like this to the scarab : let it go through units and move towards center of target, as soon as it collides with any ennemy unit, explode slightly smaller AoE I think that this would be very stupid, brain dead, and retarded. I am very glad that you are not in charge of Brood War. Aiming scarabs in Protoss vs Protoss, or against zerg clumps, wouldn't even be a thing anymore, because all scarabs would automatically hit at the edge of an army. It would barely be worth aiming at all. It would also not be possible to purposefully block scarabs with other units like it is now. Btw, here's a useful trick that not many people know about: If you have a scarab out that you know is a failure, select the reaver and press S to remove the scarab, letting you shoot a new one. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
no worries though, I'm good all right with the reavers | ||
|
Jealous
10166 Posts
On December 27 2015 06:17 vOdToasT wrote: It is not luck based. It seems luck based to you because you don't understand how it works. I think that this would be very stupid, brain dead, and retarded. I am very glad that you are not in charge of Brood War. Aiming scarabs in Protoss vs Protoss, or against zerg clumps, wouldn't even be a thing anymore, because all scarabs would automatically hit at the edge of an army. It would barely be worth aiming at all. It would also not be possible to purposefully block scarabs with other units like it is now. Btw, here's a useful trick that not many people know about: If you have a scarab out that you know is a failure, select the reaver and press S to remove the scarab, letting you shoot a new one. Woah, really? That's so cool! ^^ | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
The reason SC1 and BW is good is because the story of the campaign is good, and it gives you enough practice to click around the game. That way, when you log on to Bnet, you have some idea what you're expected to do. The fact that you have to go through paragraphs to explain to people how a scarab is shot is evidence that BW is too opaque. This is not necessarily bad, no need to become defensive about people pointing it out. | ||
|
Wray92
22 Posts
On December 27 2015 06:02 ProMeTheus112 wrote: so people do disagree about the scarab being a little broken! personally, if it was up to me I would make a change like this to the scarab : let it go through units and move towards center of target, as soon as it collides with any ennemy unit, explode slightly smaller AoE because even if you can manipulate it and overcome its defects etc, there is still quite a bit of luck involved in how big of a hit you get / whether you get a hit at all, and I personally don't like that. Also I think when it gets really good hits it is sometimes too strong. just my opinion though, still like them reavers! When in doubt, don't change anything. This is exactly what was so good about BW, and what's caused problems in SC2. Blizzard wouldn't come out to nerf flavor-of-the-month strategies, even if they looked unbeatable (like the Bisu build and Fantasy's mech TvZ did for a while. There were others, but they were all before I started watching). There were patches, but they were very infrequent and usually very minor. The game was what it was, and if there was some ridiculous strategy that looked imbalanced, it was the players' job to figure it out. | ||
|
Scarbo
294 Posts
On December 27 2015 17:32 Wray92 wrote: When in doubt, don't change anything. This is exactly what was so good about BW, and what's caused problems in SC2. Blizzard wouldn't come out to nerf flavor-of-the-month strategies, even if they looked unbeatable (like the Bisu build and Fantasy's mech TvZ did for a while. There were others, but they were all before I started watching). There were patches, but they were very infrequent and usually very minor. The game was what it was, and if there was some ridiculous strategy that looked imbalanced, it was the players' job to figure it out. This man speaks the truth. Nowadays developers are too eager to patch (because community crying). Anyone who played LoL knows how the music goes: pros start abusing a champ = champ gets nerfed = pros find the next champ to abuse. No depth can develop because the game changes so fast people are still figuring things out. Altough that's not why SC2 is bad, it sure is a bad trend in e-sports. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On December 27 2015 18:31 Scarbo wrote: This man speaks the truth. Nowadays developers are too eager to patch (because community crying). Anyone who played LoL knows how the music goes: pros start abusing a champ = champ gets nerfed = pros find the next champ to abuse. No depth can develop because the game changes so fast people are still figuring things out. Altough that's not why SC2 is bad, it sure is a bad trend in e-sports. I actually strongly/completely agree with this. I just happen to have this fantasy in my head, or this question, because it seems to be "impossible" to make a better game than BW, can BW itself be improved ? What are its flaws or limitations ? With more than a decade of play since the last patch, can we not think of how to make the game even deeper and more diverse with a bunch of changes ? I think they are interesting questions, even if the answers can be dangerous and bad. I believe that, if you give BW a bunch of changes mainly to some numbers, it should be possible to make more different strategies viable and to see units/upgrades we almost never see in game being used. | ||
|
Cele
Germany4016 Posts
On December 27 2015 19:39 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I actually strongly/completely agree with this. I just happen to have this fantasy in my head, or this question, because it seems to be "impossible" to make a better game than BW, can BW itself be improved ? What are its flaws or limitations ? With more than a decade of play since the last patch, can we not think of how to make the game even deeper and more diverse with a bunch of changes ? I think they are interesting questions, even if the answers can be dangerous and bad. I believe that, if you give BW a bunch of changes mainly to some numbers, it should be possible to make more different strategies viable and to see units/upgrades we almost never see in game being used. the point is; mainly we as a community are a) happy with the way the game plays out and b) the game is well balanced. Ofc there is theoretical room for changes in Broodwar and the game could theoretically be improved, but the benchmark is already set so high, that i active speak against it. You have to understand that Broodwar has been played with out any other balance patches since 2001. That was patch 1.08b. That means this game has been played for 14 years now by korean professionals who tried to figure everything out about the game there is to figure out. 14 years! We are talking about a time frame where  BoxeR did beat  YellOw in the Coca Cola OSL Finals up to today and your next KSL match. A lot has changed during that time in gameplay. The macro aspect of BW was not fully understood yet in 2001, many playstyles were not found yet. We didn't have Savior, Bisu and other players who revolutionized a respective matchup. The maps have actually changed a lot too. What im trying to say is; the game was good for this amount of time to top players in the world and it was balanced mainly by maps played within the pro circus. (and consequently also by us) If any changes to BW could be imagined to be good, you are not the right person to find them, as you lack the experience in the game. I am neither and neither is anybody on this forum. And certainly it's no Blizzard employee who has no idea about the game. So, the chance to destroy balance/gameplay instead of improving it is infinitely more likely to me. Look how Blizz ruined sc2 by changing something every second week. That is why most people who are into this game for some time will just plain say "no way" when you wanna talk balance/gameplay issues. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
I think that it is possible to make good changes without being Bisu / Boxer / Savior, but it takes lots of work, careful and complete analysis and testing, and other things to actually be able to put it into the game and have people want to play it. That is why I think it would be interesting to talk about it, even if just for fun. But negative effects can be more likely like you said. The most dangerous being to see today's Blizzard modify the game lol. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
when i hear people saying that they dislike the game (which i haven't, personally) i think about the idea and consequently think about the current influx of players. perhaps the current playerbase is older. expectations created from word of mouth and recommendations to play whether they're direct or indirect. they're small but important committments of figuring out how to make things work. resolution, fixes, connecting to servers, finding games (like the OP mentions). i would have worries that it's difficult to find chill players to talk and play with. people who are relatable (skill or otherwise) and truthfully won't find you overbearing to play/chat with. actually, i'm projecting some of my own concerns despite having played the game for many many years and being on iccup practice teams, ladder fiending on fish, and all that fine jazz. if i were a newbie, it'd be very daunting and i haven't even stepped into the game yet at this point. but for people to absolutely detest the game. like within your gut you hate it. burn it with fire, w/e. i don't understand. but my advice is to find a mentor who you like listening to and become an open vessel for advice, because there's a lot you can gain (enjoyment incl.) from playing a storied game like sc:bw. i remember going into all sorts of freestyle presentations deciding to share all things starcraft with a class that probably had no idea that it was the title to a game. it was embarassing but fulfilling. it was like a product i believed in, even if it was all a little naive. in my opinion (although i don't do it currently) you need to find people to laugh and play with. you know, people who -get- it. this is last generation's game and it shows sometimes, but there are a lot of hidden charms--especially for people who love clutch stuff and min/maxing. | ||
|
Avexyli
United States694 Posts
So, really it seems to be the peruvians just being rude on iccup. | ||
| ||
