Episode one Part one- for those with no knowledge of BW. Things will get more involved/dynamic as these guides go on, don't worry yourselves.
Feedback is welcome on this first piece, I should have the next part up either later today, or tomorrow. The occasional slightly odd edit in there... But I'll get smoother as I get used to this. + Show Spoiler +
Hey all-
Some of you probably know me, plenty won't. I commentate on foreigner tourneys (I'm still pretty new in that), I run team[AoV] as a co-leader, and I sponsor stuff.
I have observed that we have a had a good number- not huge but decent, number of people on this forum who consider the switch to BW from SC2. I applaud this decision, and would like to do all I can to make this easier for them.
Do you, the community, think it would be worth a series of short VODs on a total noob's introduction to BW, how to approach it from the very beginning, how to start to practice, how to study a replay, how to consider a build-order etc?
I was thinking something along the lines of episodes such as-
1- an introduction to BW, and why to play (detailing things such as- what to expect from the learning curve, key differences from SC2 mechanically, outline of practice techniques, where to start playing, what learning resources are available to you)
2- Common mistakes made.
3- Practice techniques ins-and-outs.
4- How to study a replay (with a demonstration, obviously).
I could then begin with weekly replay studies from my own replay folder (or any which viewers wished to submit), which I could hopefully get onto the TeamLiquid calendar. I know what you're thinking- people have done it before, and better than some C+/B- protoss. I think it's important to keep fresh content coming in, with people whom new players can follow in the scene now! Not in the past.
It is key to note that I would be providing only relatively high level thoughts and insights, without being at an "OMFG progamer" level, but there is also the benefits that I can point out my own mistakes, and thus probably pretty common ones, as I go along, whilst theorycrafting "Did this work or not? Why? What could I have done differently? How do I replicate this success? How can I refine it further?". I also plan to have gosu players amongst my friends to provide a few extra notes+comments on as much as I can, which I can integrate into videos.
I think we have a gap in our current scene here which stifles growth, and I would appreciate all constructive thoughts on the subject. If I made these initial beginning videos, I would post them in a forum topic, with a link to my stream and schedule for replay studies.+ Show Spoiler +
I think this is a great idea. I personally think that progamer replays are too hard to duplicate, and lower-level players are easier to follow and emulate. Plus, they can explain their reasoning in English :p
I'd love to see that. The threads of new players who "want to get into BW" keep flooding the forums. Some guide would be great. I liked the idea of "The chronicles of Kaspra(?)", too. But something was wrong with the show. I'm not even sure what it was but I think it was the lack of a concept and the lack to focus on certain subjects.
If you want to create video tutorials keep in mind start out well prepared and follow closely a central theme in every one of your VODs and shows. Personally I'm not a Day[9]-worshipper but the success of his dailies and podcasts isnt a result of his personality only but of knowing exactly what he will talk about in an episode, concentrating on it and not letting himself get distracted by minor things that don't matter for your issue.
You should do the same. A liveshow will never work out exactly as planned but having a concept and sticking to it will help. For your VOD-tutorials: They should be nearly pefect in the end. Youtube-viewers tend to close videos or skip parts, when there is a small period of time with noting important happening. Maybe recording a tutorial in smaller parts can help to keep concentration and tension high.
Actually it's all just guesswork, because I haven't done something like this myself. But that's how I would do it.
The 1st guide you want to make, the introduction, should exist in a written version (stickied in the forums), too. Vers guide and Chills collection arent enough for absolute beginners, i'm afraid.
On June 24 2011 11:30 Don_Julio wrote: I'd love to see that. The threads of new players who "want to get into BW" keep flooding the forums. Some guide would be great. I liked the idea of "The chronicles of Kaspra(?)", too. But something was wrong with the show. I'm not even sure what it was but I think it was the lack of a concept and the lack to focus on certain subjects.
If you want to create video tutorials keep in mind start out well prepared and follow closely a central theme in every one of your VODs and shows. Personally I'm not a Day[9]-worshipper but the success of his dailies and podcasts isnt a result of his personality only but of knowing exactly what he will talk about in an episode, concentrating on it and not letting himself get distracted by minor things that don't matter for your issue.
You should do the same. A liveshow will never work out exactly as planned but having a concept and sticking to it will help. For your VOD-tutorials: They should be nearly pefect in the end. Youtube-viewers tend to close videos or skip parts, when there is a small period of time with noting important happening. Maybe recording a tutorial in smaller parts can help to keep concentration and tension high.
Actually it's all just guesswork, because I haven't done something like this myself. But that's how I would do it.
The 1st guide you want to make, the introduction, should exist in a written version (stickied in the forums), too. Vers guide and Chills collection arent enough for absolute beginners, i'm afraid.
yeahhhh so true
Kaspra's show just feels like watching replays with sayle for an hour than anything else
I don't think you need to get too deep into the replay analysis. There's plenty of things there that others have done that people can look up when they're ready.
if you're going to target the guide specifically at people switching from SC2, you want to focus on that theme. Draw regular analogies between the games to help communicate points, and make sure your guide is current and up to date on SC2 as well as on BW. It is not much good writing a guide for those coming from SC2 to BW if you don't have at least a workable familiarity with how SC2 plays.
When I began dabbling in BW, the way I learned more quickly was to draw analogies to what I already understood rather than attempting to learn from scratch.
For example, I learned that a build that followed 8pylon,10gate,12gas,14core,15 pylon for PvT in Brood War was roughly analogous in its purpose to the 9pylon/13gate/15 gas//16 pylon/17 core in SC2, in that it was a fairly generic build that could lead into a number of different tech paths and was a good starting point.
This is the kind of thing you want to be emphasizing in the guide.
Here's a quote from one of the recent threads with a good example of the kind of thing I think you should focus on
On June 21 2011 09:00 Ribbon wrote: I should make a big-ass list of major differences between the two games for the benefit of anyone who wants to switch. Here's some things off the top of my head.
1. ICCUP is a lot greedier than bnet. Playing PvZ will see the protoss open forge FE like 99% of the time.
2. SC2 is only now starting to standardize, but BW is down to a science. Expect to see the same openings a lot, which is both good and bad
3. It takes a lot fewer workers to saturate a base. This means you can have 4-5 bases running without making a rediculous amount of probes, whereas in SC2 4 mining bases at once is a bit silly (unless you're 110-drone Nestea). This doesn't affect expansion timings as much as you might think, because bases also last longer, but you want to expand as much as you can get away with.
4. BW uses damage resistance, SC2 uses damage bonuses. Thus, units have higher "base" damage than in SC2, but actually take longer to kill things.
5. Blue Flame hellion drops are now a protoss unit, called the reaver. Reavers shoot banelings that sometimes get performance anxiety and fail to explode. Vultures, the BW equivalent to Hellions, can instead lay mines.
6. High ground advantage is different. You don't need vision to shoot back at a high ground unit that's attacking you, but you have a miss chance
Oh, and it would also be a great idea to stream some pro level games and commentate them in English as part of the instructional videos. A lot of people learned a lot about SC2 from watching the far more numerous (than BW) English casts of the games being played.
On June 24 2011 14:40 Dhalphir wrote: Oh, and it would also be a great idea to stream some pro level games and commentate them in English as part of the instructional videos. A lot of people learned a lot about SC2 from watching the far more numerous (than BW) English casts of the games being played.
Ok, this sounds like a good idea. Get people some variety, some excitement. I do already cast foreigner games, but it's a different kettle of fish.
Don_Julio wrote:The 1st guide you want to make, the introduction, should exist in a written version (stickied in the forums), too. Vers guide and Chills collection arent enough for absolute beginners, i'm afraid.
Yeah, im wanting to make BW more accessible at an absolute beginning level. The videos will be kept relatively short, because i think a lot of noobs will be daunted by huge essays if they don't quite understand what's going on first. People will then also be able to take away a few clear points from each one, rather than assimilating masses of information.
On June 24 2011 14:36 Dhalphir wrote: if you're going to target the guide specifically at people switching from SC2, you want to focus on that theme. Draw regular analogies between the games to help communicate points, and make sure your guide is current and up to date on SC2 as well as on BW. It is not much good writing a guide for those coming from SC2 to BW if you don't have at least a workable familiarity with how SC2 plays.
When I began dabbling in BW, the way I learned more quickly was to draw analogies to what I already understood rather than attempting to learn from scratch.
For example, I learned that a build that followed 8pylon,10gate,12gas,14core,15 pylon for PvT in Brood War was roughly analogous in its purpose to the 9pylon/13gate/15 gas//16 pylon/17 core in SC2, in that it was a fairly generic build that could lead into a number of different tech paths and was a good starting point.
This is the kind of thing you want to be emphasizing in the guide.
On June 24 2011 14:36 Dhalphir wrote: I don't think you need to get too deep into the replay analysis. There's plenty of things there that others have done that people can look up when they're ready.
if you're going to target the guide specifically at people switching from SC2, you want to focus on that theme. Draw regular analogies between the games to help communicate points, and make sure your guide is current and up to date on SC2 as well as on BW. It is not much good writing a guide for those coming from SC2 to BW if you don't have at least a workable familiarity with how SC2 plays.
When I began dabbling in BW, the way I learned more quickly was to draw analogies to what I already understood rather than attempting to learn from scratch.
For example, I learned that a build that followed 8pylon,10gate,12gas,14core,15 pylon for PvT in Brood War was roughly analogous in its purpose to the 9pylon/13gate/15 gas//16 pylon/17 core in SC2, in that it was a fairly generic build that could lead into a number of different tech paths and was a good starting point.
This is the kind of thing you want to be emphasizing in the guide.
Here's a quote from one of the recent threads with a good example of the kind of thing I think you should focus on
On June 21 2011 09:00 Ribbon wrote: I should make a big-ass list of major differences between the two games for the benefit of anyone who wants to switch. Here's some things off the top of my head.
1. ICCUP is a lot greedier than bnet. Playing PvZ will see the protoss open forge FE like 99% of the time.
2. SC2 is only now starting to standardize, but BW is down to a science. Expect to see the same openings a lot, which is both good and bad
3. It takes a lot fewer workers to saturate a base. This means you can have 4-5 bases running without making a rediculous amount of probes, whereas in SC2 4 mining bases at once is a bit silly (unless you're 110-drone Nestea). This doesn't affect expansion timings as much as you might think, because bases also last longer, but you want to expand as much as you can get away with.
4. BW uses damage resistance, SC2 uses damage bonuses. Thus, units have higher "base" damage than in SC2, but actually take longer to kill things.
5. Blue Flame hellion drops are now a protoss unit, called the reaver. Reavers shoot banelings that sometimes get performance anxiety and fail to explode. Vultures, the BW equivalent to Hellions, can instead lay mines.
6. High ground advantage is different. You don't need vision to shoot back at a high ground unit that's attacking you, but you have a miss chance
Ribbon's #5 is the funniest thing I've read in a while.
Because it is mechanically much more demanding. It is more balanced and in my opinion sharpens your strategical thinking better than SC2. I still play BW more often than SC2, and the BW skills translate much better to SC2 than the other way around.
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
The official SC2 ladder is set up to divide the playerbase into five roughly even groups. The ICCUP ladder is designed to be very difficult to climb. So 1/5th of SC2 players are in Bronze, but much more of the ICCUP playerbase is some variety of D. If you're not aware of that, it can be very discouraging for SC2 players to try BW and be stuck in the bottom rank for a very long time (SC2 players who use NTBL are more used to an ICCUP-style ladder where most people are Ds, but NTBL isn't really big yet. It will be soon, though!).
Because there's no auto-matchmaking, ICCUP can be intensely frustrating for new people, because you never really know what you're going to get, even without smurfing.
SC2 Zerg to BW Zerg is the easiest transition. SC2 Terran to BW Terran is the hardest.
Hosting a game on ICCUP is an epic adventure in and of itself, because you have to screw with your router.
When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
This is obviously SC2, but everything Destiny says about mechanics here is two or three times as true in BW, where mechanics are more important. I would actually make this series of videos (the are like 17, him going higher and higher) the very first thing to show to an SC2 player wanting to switch, because it makes a very important point about the importance of mechanics using terms SC2 players are very familiar with. And then just caption the video "But like 3 times as much"
Hi, im a sc2 player and I tried to go back to BW. I have some problem with BW. THe first is I can only find game hosted by korean and can't find partner or other people who speak in english. Maybe now everybody is on ICCUP? CAn you make a video about how to connect to ICCUP and meet the communautie?
In sc2 im like hight diamond and very close to master, but in BW im like D or D-. I think one of the reason is : it's to hard to control your units and I doN,t really know BO or how to move my tank with vulture ?! and How to beat lurcker ect ... I never saw this unit of my life. ( it's look basic but for me it's not) And even in sc2 I have macro problem so for me BW it's like so HARDD.
On June 25 2011 08:19 Gyro_SC2 wrote: (sorry english is not my first language)
Hi, im a sc2 player and I tried to go back to BW. I have some problem with BW. THe first is I can only find game hosted by korean and can't find partner or other people who speak in english. Maybe now everybody is on ICCUP? CAn you make a video about how to connect to ICCUP and meet the communautie?
In sc2 im like hight diamond and very close to master, but in BW im like D or D-. I think one of the reason is : it's to hard to control your units and I doN,t really know BO or how to move my tank with vulture ?! and How to beat lurcker ect ... I never saw this unit of my life. ( it's look basic but for me it's not) And even in sc2 I have macro problem so for me BW it's like so HARDD.
Ok, I do realize that BW is much more skill demanding game than SC2, but... It seems that the scene is dieing now that sc2 is out and climbing. There are no big tournaments except for Korea, I've read someone saying that it's harder and harder to get a ladder match on iccup, so obviously the scene is on a downfall. As much as this game is demanding, there's no possibility to achieve anything in it anymore(not that foreigners ever stood a chance against Koreans). So my worry is, is there a point in moving to an old game that is going to disappear in the near future? I mean, I understand BW veterans that didn't like SC2 switching back. But how can starting to play BW from scratch at this point be anyhow rewarding? Coz ok, you gained better mechanics than SC2 players, but soon you'll be left alone in a dead game with nowhere to showoff those skills, unless you switch to SC2, right? Ofcourse BW is gonna live for a few more years(sure it's already out for over 12, but it had no other global RTS to challenge), it still has lots of fans, but seeing how SC2 grows I cant really see it not overcome BW, even in Korea. I'm pretty sure some(if not alot) korean pros will switch to sc2 in august when their licenses expire. All of this might be written in ignorance, since I obviously dont follow BW scene, but how do you see starting plying bw to be a good time investment and how do you see this game in near future?
-There were at least 4 foreigner tournaments popping up for BW withing the last month. -Fish and Brain servers have 30k-50k people between them at peak times -A part of SC2's popularity is hype and people who just wanted the next big thing, which will probably drop off eventually (especially when Blizzard pumps cash into SC3 and abandons the SC2 tournament scene) -Korean scene is still going strong, even the broadcasting rights thing got settled -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
Can we please not turn this thread into a "my game is better than yours" flamewar thread? It just makes people angry. Neither game is going to disappear in the next five years, so cut it out.
On June 25 2011 09:41 HornyHerring wrote: Ok, I do realize that BW is much more skill demanding game than SC2, but... It seems that the scene is dieing now that sc2 is out and climbing. There are no big tournaments except for Korea, I've read someone saying that it's harder and harder to get a ladder match on iccup, so obviously the scene is on a downfall. As much as this game is demanding, there's no possibility to achieve anything in it anymore(not that foreigners ever stood a chance against Koreans). So my worry is, is there a point in moving to an old game that is going to disappear in the near future? I mean, I understand BW veterans that didn't like SC2 switching back. But how can starting to play BW from scratch at this point be anyhow rewarding? Coz ok, you gained better mechanics than SC2 players, but soon you'll be left alone in a dead game with nowhere to showoff those skills, unless you switch to SC2, right? Ofcourse BW is gonna live for a few more years(sure it's already out for over 12, but it had no other global RTS to challenge), it still has lots of fans, but seeing how SC2 grows I cant really see it not overcome BW, even in Korea. I'm pretty sure some(if not alot) korean pros will switch to sc2 in august when their licenses expire. All of this might be written in ignorance, since I obviously dont follow BW scene, but how do you see starting plying bw to be a good time investment and how do you see this game in near future?
And again, not trolling or hating on BW etc.
SC2 is a different game from BW. It is not a replacement, and will never be. It is just another RTS that is popular right now. There are unique things about BW that will keep it very popular for years, just like how CS 1.6 is still a very popular game. BW isn't going anywhere, and your skills will be plenty relevant for a very long time. If anything, I think that BW skills will be easier to appreciate in the very long term than SC2 skills. When both games are considered "dead" very long from now, I expect that more people still will be playing BW.
General: Ultras are substantially better than in SC2. Guardians are like Brood Lords, but crappier. Defilers are mandatory, as is consume.
ZvT: Lurkers are pretty good. A few lurkers can defend a base against drops, making Spires less mandatory than in SC2. Muta harassment is still good, but Science Vessels counter mutas so so hard, so you don't see them as much in the late game. Scourge are good for killing those vessels. Defilers are absolutely mandatory late game. You will not get bunker rushed every game, but expect some early pressure to force sunkens.
ZvP: Most Protoss open Forge FE, and get Corsairs. Corsairs are like phoenixes that can't lift, but they're still good at killing overlords. Corsair/Dark Templar is common, but more common last I really checked is corsair reaver. Reaver drops are the BW version of Blue-flame hellion drops, and can kill your drones pretty hard.
ZvZ: You thought SC2 ZvZ was twitchy and low-econ? BW ZvZ is muta/scourge vs muta/scourge with a rock/paper/scissors opening (unless you're Jaedong, and you're not). Games that progress to hive tech are pretty rare, and a little awesome. Remember SC2 PvP, before the 4gate nerf? ZvZ is basically that with mutas. It's considered the worst matchup
On June 25 2011 11:00 Ribbon wrote: Match-ups (From a Zerg Perspective)
General: Ultras are substantially better than in SC2. Guardians are like Brood Lords, but crappier. Defilers are mandatory, as is consume.
ZvT: Lurkers are pretty good. A few lurkers can defend a base against drops, making Spires less mandatory than in SC2. Muta harassment is still good, but Science Vessels counter mutas so so hard, so you don't see them as much in the late game. Scourge are good for killing those vessels. Defilers are absolutely mandatory late game. You will not get bunker rushed every game, but expect some early pressure to force sunkens.
ZvP: Most Protoss open Forge FE, and get Corsairs. Corsairs are like phoenixes that can't lift, but they're still good at killing overlords. Corsair/Dark Templar is common, but more common last I really checked is corsair reaver. Reaver drops are the BW version of Blue-flame hellion drops, and can kill your drones pretty hard.
I honestly don't think your knowledge of BW is sufficient to write up posts trying to explain it to SC2 players. Part of the problem is that you are trying to explain something so deep in only a few words, but there is also some misinformation. In what world is Corsair/Reaver the standard of PvZ?
On June 25 2011 11:00 Ribbon wrote: Match-ups (From a Zerg Perspective)
General: Ultras are substantially better than in SC2. Guardians are like Brood Lords, but crappier. Defilers are mandatory, as is consume.
ZvT: Lurkers are pretty good. A few lurkers can defend a base against drops, making Spires less mandatory than in SC2. Muta harassment is still good, but Science Vessels counter mutas so so hard, so you don't see them as much in the late game. Scourge are good for killing those vessels. Defilers are absolutely mandatory late game. You will not get bunker rushed every game, but expect some early pressure to force sunkens.
ZvP: Most Protoss open Forge FE, and get Corsairs. Corsairs are like phoenixes that can't lift, but they're still good at killing overlords. Corsair/Dark Templar is common, but more common last I really checked is corsair reaver. Reaver drops are the BW version of Blue-flame hellion drops, and can kill your drones pretty hard.
I honestly don't think your knowledge of BW is sufficient to write up posts trying to explain it to SC2 players. Part of the problem is that you are trying to explain something so deep in only a few words, but there is also some misinformation. In what world is Corsair/Reaver the standard of PvZ?
The world of late 2009 to mid-2010, when I watched/played a lot of BW. I'm kind of out-of-date on my metagame, but I wanted to get the thread back on topic.
On June 25 2011 10:42 Ribbon wrote: Can we please not turn this thread into a "my game is better than yours" flamewar thread? It just makes people angry. Neither game is going to disappear in the next five years, so cut it out.
I did not flame anything or anyone, so your post is irrelevant.
On June 25 2011 10:06 Magus wrote: Alright, so point by point on that.
-There were at least 4 foreigner tournaments popping up for BW withing the last month. -Fish and Brain servers have 30k-50k people between them at peak times -A part of SC2's popularity is hype and people who just wanted the next big thing, which will probably drop off eventually (especially when Blizzard pumps cash into SC3 and abandons the SC2 tournament scene) -Korean scene is still going strong, even the broadcasting rights thing got settled -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
Seems I've got insufficient info then. I rest my case. Peace. : )
@HornyHerring The scene had always been small outside of korea. And I still have my doubts that SC2 might change that. TBH I expect SC2 to be also dominated by koreans. In the next 5 years perhaps. + Show Spoiler +
Or probably Europe will be the hub of eSport outside korea. Seing how good their players are.
I also find it funny how people say that "Its hard to find games on ICCUP" because I can get games in less than 5 minutes you should be able to get game easy from D to D+ or maybe even C- level. And I usually play on time where ICCUP has 400 people online. And I could even get games faster than that if I play on peak hours 700-1000 people online.
On June 25 2011 10:06 Magus wrote: -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
JulyZerg? Nada? Maybe July was getting out of shape towards the end but last I checked Nada was still taking games from Stork and Flash.
Anyways, its been awhile since i played BW and ive forgotten a lot of stuff, but what is the optimal saturation for mineral lines? Is it like, 1 per patch + 3-4?
On June 25 2011 10:06 Magus wrote: -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
JulyZerg? Nada? Maybe July was getting out of shape towards the end but last I checked Nada was still taking games from Stork and Flash.
Anyways, its been awhile since i played BW and ive forgotten a lot of stuff, but what is the optimal saturation for mineral lines? Is it like, 1 per patch + 3-4?
No just no. July wasn't getting games at all for forever and NaDa was, what, taking turns with Midas and Major for the third terran spot on Wemade, not a top team. While I do not doubt that their level of play was still very high, they were no longer among the people who could, say, qualify for a starleague.
Interestingly TLPD claims that NaDa has never won an official game against Flash and that his last win over Stork was almost two years before his retirement.
Optimal saturation depends on what race you play. Zerg tends to have workers spread more thinly over more bases. Afaik T and P consider 2.5/min. full saturation, while Z rarely go over 1.5. This varies depending on the strategy and is rough estimate.
On June 25 2011 10:06 Magus wrote: Alright, so point by point on that.
-There were at least 4 foreigner tournaments popping up for BW withing the last month. -Fish and Brain servers have 30k-50k people between them at peak times -A part of SC2's popularity is hype and people who just wanted the next big thing, which will probably drop off eventually (especially when Blizzard pumps cash into SC3 and abandons the SC2 tournament scene) -Korean scene is still going strong, even the broadcasting rights thing got settled -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
How does the SC2 scene rely on Blizzard for tournaments? That statement makes no sense. Also your conclusion that SC3 will beat SC2 is ironic because if that's how games work, why hasn't SC2 overshadowed BW by now?
On June 25 2011 10:06 Magus wrote: Alright, so point by point on that.
-There were at least 4 foreigner tournaments popping up for BW withing the last month. -Fish and Brain servers have 30k-50k people between them at peak times -A part of SC2's popularity is hype and people who just wanted the next big thing, which will probably drop off eventually (especially when Blizzard pumps cash into SC3 and abandons the SC2 tournament scene) -Korean scene is still going strong, even the broadcasting rights thing got settled -The only progamers switching over are no longer good enough to contend, or weren't good enough to compete at the top level anyway.
How does the SC2 scene rely on Blizzard for tournaments? That statement makes no sense. Also your conclusion that SC3 will beat SC2 is ironic because if that's how games work, why hasn't SC2 overshadowed BW by now?
Because every SC2 tournaments have been founded by Blizzard in one or another. The GSLs very much feel like an artificial tournaments created by blizzard instead of evolving by itself. And the reason why SC2 haven't been overshadowed BW by now is because well BW is just a superior game and SC2 will be more superior than SC3 so yeah.....
I think you should make some 1-minute guides for the common rushes/openings (4 pool, 9 pool, 2 Fact, 2 Gate, BBS, etc..) and also some 1-minute guides on how to stop them. The SC2 ones are quite humorous.
Sayle's show was alright, but it lacked direction. There wasn't much driving force to it, and at times I felt like they were dragging things on longer than they needed to. If you are planning on doing a show, make sure you have a main focus for each episode.
On June 25 2011 11:00 Ribbon wrote: Match-ups (From a Zerg Perspective)
General: Ultras are substantially better than in SC2. Guardians are like Brood Lords, but crappier. Defilers are mandatory, as is consume.
ZvT: Lurkers are pretty good. A few lurkers can defend a base against drops, making Spires less mandatory than in SC2. Muta harassment is still good, but Science Vessels counter mutas so so hard, so you don't see them as much in the late game. Scourge are good for killing those vessels. Defilers are absolutely mandatory late game. You will not get bunker rushed every game, but expect some early pressure to force sunkens.
ZvP: Most Protoss open Forge FE, and get Corsairs. Corsairs are like phoenixes that can't lift, but they're still good at killing overlords. Corsair/Dark Templar is common, but more common last I really checked is corsair reaver. Reaver drops are the BW version of Blue-flame hellion drops, and can kill your drones pretty hard.
ZvZ: You thought SC2 ZvZ was twitchy and low-econ? BW ZvZ is muta/scourge vs muta/scourge with a rock/paper/scissors opening (unless you're Jaedong, and you're not). Games that progress to hive tech are pretty rare, and a little awesome. Remember SC2 PvP, before the 4gate nerf? ZvZ is basically that with mutas. It's considered the worst matchup
lol so much of this is wrong i wont even point it out, its nice that you tried and all but don't go around trying to explain BW strategy.
On June 26 2011 11:00 Nazza wrote: I think you should make some 1-minute guides for the common rushes/openings (4 pool, 9 pool, 2 Fact, 2 Gate, BBS, etc..) and also some 1-minute guides on how to stop them. The SC2 ones are quite humorous.
I second this idea. Also a I'd love to see some BO specific guides, with an in-depth look at the mechanics in each. These episodes would probably be quite similar to the informative D/G threads in the strategy forum, with details on what the BO is, what is its purpose, how to react to scouting information, transitions into late-game, etc. This would be especially useful if you could get some high level players of the race in question to help with the discussion. I'd love if you could do this alternating weeks with the replay-analysis (or perhaps integrating replay analysis?)
On June 25 2011 11:00 Ribbon wrote: Match-ups (From a Zerg Perspective)
General: Ultras are substantially better than in SC2. Guardians are like Brood Lords, but crappier. Defilers are mandatory, as is consume.
ZvT: Lurkers are pretty good. A few lurkers can defend a base against drops, making Spires less mandatory than in SC2. Muta harassment is still good, but Science Vessels counter mutas so so hard, so you don't see them as much in the late game. Scourge are good for killing those vessels. Defilers are absolutely mandatory late game. You will not get bunker rushed every game, but expect some early pressure to force sunkens.
ZvP: Most Protoss open Forge FE, and get Corsairs. Corsairs are like phoenixes that can't lift, but they're still good at killing overlords. Corsair/Dark Templar is common, but more common last I really checked is corsair reaver. Reaver drops are the BW version of Blue-flame hellion drops, and can kill your drones pretty hard.
ZvZ: You thought SC2 ZvZ was twitchy and low-econ? BW ZvZ is muta/scourge vs muta/scourge with a rock/paper/scissors opening (unless you're Jaedong, and you're not). Games that progress to hive tech are pretty rare, and a little awesome. Remember SC2 PvP, before the 4gate nerf? ZvZ is basically that with mutas. It's considered the worst matchup
lol so much of this is wrong i wont even point it out, its nice that you tried and all but don't go around trying to explain BW strategy.
I might point stuff out...
GENERAL Zerg: Pick your opening. You have the option of pool first, hatch first, (or if you're crazy(depending on the matchup)) gas first, which you will generally transition into either mutalisks or lurkers. The earlier you get your gas the quicker your tech, but the lower your zergling count. An FE gets you a nice econ advantage, but pool first openings expand fairly early too and are safer but you do end up with less drones.
ZvT: Generally starts with 12 hatch into 3 hatch muta. 3 Hatch lurker is also an option but mutas are much more standard. 2 hatch builds are also available for those who want to be more aggressive, and then there are all the all-ins for the REALLY aggressive players.
The usual game will consist of an FE, make some lings when the spawning pool is done to make sure the Terran doesn't walk in an kill half your drones, start your lair and get ling speed, keep droning up unless you see death and destruction on the way, start your lair tech of choice (mutas or lurkers), use your tech of choice to delay the Terran's attacks and keep him in his base (or just survive his attack at your base) and put up your third and begin teching to Hive. Once hive is complete you MUST get defilers in a standard game to be able to survive the Terran's push, research consume immediately after the defiler mound finishes as that is the most important upgrade you have.
From there you just take bases and macro up, killing the Terran's expos with control groups of lings, drops, or full on attacks. Try to whittle away his army with plague and lurkers and dark swarm, or if he goes mech try to whittle away his tanks slowly but surely (queens are an option if he gets set up).
ZvP: I don't know as much about this since the Neo Bisu and 4 base 6 Hatch Turtle/Muta stuff started popping up... Some general points for ZvP, You want a 3:1 ratio of zerglings to zealots or your zerglings will get slaughtered, especially once the P gets +1 weapons. Zerglings are great vs dragoons just make you surround them so they can't micro away Mass hydra is actually viable, as once they get in a large enough group Protoss cannot win without storms or reavers Mutalisks are countered by corsairs, you need large amounts of scourge if you want to go mutas (using them just to snipe the P's tech units is viable) Lurkers are almost always added into the army eventually, whether it is to contain the P or defend all of the Z's bases. Protoss units have no way to heal so plague does amazing things for you, especially with cracklings (+3 attack +3 carapace Adrenal Glands upgraded zerglings, the highest DPS in the game) out.
ZvZ: EVERY SINGLE DRONE COUNTS. EVERY SINGLE LARVA COUNTS. Droning up is hard in ZvZ because you are only going to have one or two hatcheries, three if you're lucky, which means if you make a drone you will have two less zerglings for the next 13 seconds (or however long it takes to get a new larva). This makes the tradeoff between drones and army MUCH more pronounced than in the other matchups. Alright now that we have that out of the way.
The main openings are 12pool gas, 9pool gas, 12hatch, and overgas. 12hatch beats 12pool because the lings are too late to punish it, 12pool and overpool/gas beat 9pool because the lings hatch in time to defend and you have more drones, 9pool beats 12hatch (usually) because 12hatch has such late lings. Expanding generally only happens when one can comfortably hold it (read: their opponent just expanded and can't attack), so it's rarer than in other matchups.
With your first 100 gas you can choose to start your lair immediately and cut into your ling count, or you can choose to get ling speed and be aggressive with a higher zergling count. The player that goes lair first is usually going to have to sacrifice map control until his mutalisks are out and play defense unless they can sneak some lings out.
Once the spire is out all of your gas goes into mutalisks and scourge. Whoever can have more mutalisks at the time of the first major engagement is probably going to win the game, so see if you can scourge effectively. Mutalisks (in numbers >=4 are perfectly capable of killing near limitless amounts of scourge from a single direction if microed well enough).
When you finally have enough gas for upgrades, note that +1 Air Carapace is the upgrade of choice, as it significantly reduces the damage you take from enemy mutalisks, compared to adding fractions of a damage point to the bounces of your own mutalisks.
Having a solid BW guide for guys from SC2 would be AMAZING! I'm going to college next year and there is no guaruntee that SC2 will run smoothly on my laptop so I will probably switch to BW especially because BW intrigues me.
YES YES YES! please do it! I'm a scII player myself who got into bw due to ScII and the phenomenon that esport is. Right now im trying to get a hang of the metagame via VoD's of FlaSh etc ( which is my god btw), but the mechanics are the thing i stumple apon. While its easy to stay below ~700 minerals with efficient army use in ScII, it's close to impossible in sc:bw to me :/ So please tell me how the pros use their units properly while not forgetting macro!
Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
I'd say the theoretical and strategical skill are the same, but with more options in BW from the micro the mechanical and tactical skill are much higher in BW than in SC2.
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
Yeah which is demonstrated by that vod on page one of a guy owning people with pure mass queen. So much psychology and theory. There is no aspect where BW is easier that SCII.
On June 27 2011 21:12 hellbound wrote: Yeah which is demonstrated by that vod on page one of a guy owning people with pure mass queen. So much psychology and theory. There is no aspect where BW is easier that SCII.
Metagame. SC2 is in its infancy and the metagame is still up in the air. To properly study for a matchup you need to do a lot more replay/bo studying because people use like a thousand different strategies still in SC2.
In SC1 the meta is much more controlled, and THAT is why mechanics are huge. There are only one or two choices when it comes to unit composition in SC1 because of a stable meta, and as such the difference between players (apart from early game BO) is in their mechanics.
SC2 and SC1 are not on a scale, so lets move away from that form of thinking.
My ban was retracted, hurray! I will start work on this tonight- I will try and keep episodes short and concise, without being distracted from the focal point each time. Once I've made a good headway into my making notes tonight, I'll see how much content we're looking at for the introductory episodes, before people are ready for replay analysis. At the moment I really don't know how much this is going to be ^^.
If people have any wishes for particular themes/areas of focus, comments here will be read and are greatly appreciated.
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
Yeah which is demonstrated by that vod on page one of a guy owning people with pure mass queen. So much psychology and theory. There is no aspect where BW is easier that SCII.
What? No!
That is entirely the OPPOSITE of the point of that VOD. Destiny was a professional gamer playing against bronze-leaguers on a smurf account. His point was that strategy and metagame didn't matter at all at levels under platinum, because he could do an utterly stupid build and still win on pure mechanics. He explained this in no unclear terms. This is even more true in BW, which was the point I was making.
Over time SC2 is having builds disappear for one reason or another, and standards are developing (especially in TvZ), so execution is becoming more and more important. I'm pretty sure that eventually SC2 will become about who has the best multitasking, while BW will remain about who has the best mechanics, in the same way WC3 is about who has the best micro, even though all three games have elements of mechanics, micro, and multitasking in them.
On June 28 2011 04:34 ImbaTosS wrote: My ban was retracted, hurray! I will start work on this tonight- I will try and keep episodes short and concise, without being distracted from the focal point each time. Once I've made a good headway into my making notes tonight, I'll see how much content we're looking at for the introductory episodes, before people are ready for replay analysis. At the moment I really don't know how much this is going to be ^^.
If people have any wishes for particular themes/areas of focus, comments here will be read and are greatly appreciated.
I think you should start simple. People who understand SC2 understand broad concepts like tech, timing attacks, and map control, but there are a lot of little details, and those little details can add up to a general sense of confusion. Because it's a newer game, the SC2 community is a bit more about figuring things out for themselves through trial and error, so I think a good set of videos would be something like
1. Playing against the very easy computer using a simple, basic build. Wow, making marines is a lot harder in this game. 2. Playing against a real opponent. Oh no, we lost . How can we fix this problem? 3. We've determined what we did wrong, and are now playing better. 4. A more advanced build. I'm pressuring with marines to force sunkens and units instead of drones. I'm getting two armories because I'm going to switch to mech and do a 1/1 timing 5. Analysis of a pro-level game, preferably one with a similar build, so that there's a progression from I LIKE TANKS to the refinement of the Flash double armory build that he was doing last time I followed him closely.
I think SC2 players like to figure out builds for themselves, and are a bit less warm towards "It's good because Flash does it", especially when they don't understand why Flash does it.
Take a look at this thread. This is an SC2 build that pros don't do (because it's too passive), but is MASSIVELY popular on the ladder because it's super-safe and forces a macro game. See how it's explained? Even though it's an SC2 build and thus in terms that SC2 players would understand, Spanishiwa not only lists everything he does, but why he does it, and how it plays into his overall game plan. This is the other reason the build is so popular, because it's a plan and not a list, so players can go back to it if weird things happen in the game.Something like that for a Brood War build will be EXTREMELY useful to an SC2 player looking to switch, and probably a few Ds as well.
SC2 mechanics are definitely simpler than BW mechanics, but day[9] was still able to spend twohours on it. That's the kind of think BW needs. The best, most detailed explanation of how to have good mechanics should probably not be an SC2 thing. It should be a BW thing. Take it as a challenge!
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
Yeah which is demonstrated by that vod on page one of a guy owning people with pure mass queen. So much psychology and theory. There is no aspect where BW is easier that SCII.
What? No!
That is entirely the OPPOSITE of the point of that VOD. Destiny was a professional gamer playing against bronze-leaguers on a smurf account. His point was that strategy and metagame didn't matter at all at levels under platinum, because he could do an utterly stupid build and still win on pure mechanics. He explained this in no unclear terms. This is even more true in BW, which was the point I was making.
On June 27 2011 09:57 BlueArchon wrote: Interesting. I am switching from Sc2 --> Sc1 due to the fact that sc1 requires more skill level making it much more exciting. I am currently D- as terran as I die from Zerg: expo --> sunken --> muta. Very deadly.
I think it may be because of my slowness while using my laptop with the ridiculous wierd screen that forces the game screen to be so small the units are hard to move around accurately.
So, i use a bigger monitor and connect it via VGA. So, far not much progress and because of that I can tell BW is hardcore! Which is why i'm switching over! :D
i don't think you should say that sc:bw requires more skill. This has been discussed over and over, but sc2 requires a different kind of skill, it's much more heavy on the psychological and theoretical part than on the crisp mechanical part.
Yeah which is demonstrated by that vod on page one of a guy owning people with pure mass queen. So much psychology and theory. There is no aspect where BW is easier that SCII.
What? No!
That is entirely the OPPOSITE of the point of that VOD. Destiny was a professional gamer playing against bronze-leaguers on a smurf account. His point was that strategy and metagame didn't matter at all at levels under platinum, because he could do an utterly stupid build and still win on pure mechanics. He explained this in no unclear terms. This is even more true in BW, which was the point I was making.
Seeing 2 basic Zerg guides and no Terran info (of course, until OP does his thing) I'm going to give VERY BASIC instructions that go into very little depth, but hopefully nobody flames me for giving false info. If anything you see is false, this is because I don't + Show Spoiler +
Overlords: The reason I'm listing this unit is because it now has vision, enabling it to see wraiths/spider mines. There are no more overseers.
Lurkers: These are the annoying things that look like spiders, can burrow (at which point you will need to scan/have a Science Vessel) and shoot out spines that do linear splash. They are dangerous even in small numbers and can decimate MnM - it takes only two hits to kill a marine, and since your MnM will usually be in a ball, this means many will die with only two strikes.
Defilers: These look like scorpions. They have very powerful abilities, like Plague (which reduces units' health to 1, leaving them very vulnerable or draining Medic energy hugely) Dark Swarm (a huge orange cloud which shifts ranged attacks inside the cloud and prevents anything but melee/splash damage from happening to units inside the cloud, rendering marines useless - run the fuck away from this shit) and consume (passive, which allows them to eat Zerglings or whatever other friendly units to regain energy FAST). They come only in late game, allowing you to make a timing push after you have Vessels but before they have Defilers.
Queens: Not technically a new unit, but they might as well be. They fly around really fast, and have abilities like Ensnare(Green goo which limits your units' movement) Spawn Broodlings (kinda like Broodlords, OWNS mech units like Goliaths (which you should be familiar with from campaign)) and Infest Command Center (really rare - when your CC is in red health, allows them to take it over and make "Infested Terran" which are really different from SC2 - they are like ground-based scourge that do like 500 damage and run pretty fast but have low health and bad AI)
Devourers: Kinda like a new breed of Infestors. They look like big mouths and spit purple goo called Acid Spores that do damage AND weaken the unit they hit to the next attack. Luckily, they can only attack air units and are rarely used (Hive tech)
** NOTE: When I say MnM, I do not mean Marine-Marauder. I mean Marine-Medic - there are no more marauders in BW, and dropships are only dropships.**
Ultras are worse in BW, but are still total bitches to kill. Hydras are used more often in BW, and Lurkers are morphed from Hydras. No more banelings!!!!! Overlords cannot spawn creep, Nydus Networks can only come up when there is creep. There are no more creep tumors or spawn larva.
Dragoons You will see this unit in EVERY game in which Protoss is involved. It is basically a slightly stronger, slightly tougher version of a Stalker. They are used to deny scouting, make pushes, and are a "staple" of PvAnything. Luckily, they will crumple to even unsieged tanks without Zealot support, and Spider mines (which we'll get to later) will annhilate them - one spider mine almost kills a dragoon. You can block them off during early pressure (like from 2gate) with a bunker and they'll probz retreat as soon as you get a tank out.
Reavers: These guys look like armored slugs, and seem to behave accordingly, until they shoot. They shoot little blue balls of energy called Scarabs, which can .1 shot marines (that's right, one of these shits can kill 10 marines, scvs, whatever small units you have). They have very low mobility, though, allowing you to kill them quickly or snipe the shuttles in which they are usually carried. Wraiths are a good counter in generally to Reaver play, which almost always involves Shuttles. Also, Reavers can't shoot up, and must make Scarabs before they can attack.
Corsairs: Kinda like Phoenixes, except they look worse and can't lift. You won't see them in TvP unless you go Wraiths (which is kinda gas heavy for TvP but I'm not supposed to be giving you strat tips).
Carriers: Reason I'm listing these is because they are actually a viable option in BW. Very hard to kill when massed, unless you do a counter with Science Vessels (EMP, Ghosts don't anymore) Ghosts (for Lockdown, which prevents them from moving or attacking) and Goliaths (which you should be fairly familiar with). But once again, I digress. They don't have an attack of their own, but must make Interceptors, these small flying units that do 6 damage but are powerful in mass. Not massed, Carriers kinda suck - 4 poorly micro-ed Goliaths at most are required to take down a single Carrier.
Dark Archons Very rarely will you see these units. They have no base attack, but they do have abilities like Feedback (where a targeted enemy spellcaster will have damage done to it equivalent to the energy it has), Mind Control (which allows them to control any enemy unit, even a drone/SCV and build up a Terran/Zerg army as well) and Maelstrom (like an area-effect version of lockdown which affects bio units). They can be annoying to your Science Vessels, and are a part of the Royal Stove Strategy. They look like Archons, but are Dark Red instead of Blue.
Arbiters: The bad boys of TvP, these things are fucking monsters. They look pretty damn weird, I can't really describe them too well. Their attack is only 10 damage, but they have super powerful abilities. The first is Stasis, in which they freeze an area of units, which can then neither give nor receive damage. Super effective vs. your Siege Tanks, as after the battle is done you will either have to risk additional losses to stay near your frozen tanks, or else they will just position Dragoons/Zealots around within your minimum attack range and make piecework of your frozen tanks once they "thaw". The second is Recall, in which an Arbiter takes a bunch of friendly units anywhere on the map in a 5x5 matrix and teleports them to its position. That's right - the unassuming army guarding the natural becomes a ravaging force right in your supply line if you aren't careful. Use EMP (which takes away energy and shields from Arbiters) and/or missile turrets to counter them, otherwise your life will be hell. Oh, and they also make close friendly units invisible, so you need to have SV's or scans anyway. Fuck Arbiters.
**NOTE: The following contains a lot of butthurt rage against the Protoss in general. I'm not going to lie, I don't think it takes as much skill to play Toss well (at low level, before you Bisu fans start shitting. I don't like him, either - Best is a good example of a non-asshole Toss player). I hate the Zerg, but I respect the Zerg. I do not respect the Protoss.**
There are no Colossi in SCBW. This does not mean that you can win with marines. You will need factory units to face Protoss - Marines will NOT cut it other than early game (to soak up Dragoon fire) or like Deep Six (a 6 rax - that's building 6 barracks's) or some random all-in MnM. This will not cut it unless you are Flash or Boxer. This means that you will need gas earlier, so start a refinery at 11/12 rather than spamming marines.
The main reason for this is that Psi Storms will not kill tanks of goliaths as fast as Bio. Might seem petty, but if you've ever seen two control groups of MnM die in 5 seconds to 4 clicks, you will understand.
DT's are retarded as fuck. They do really high damage, and are invisible. I suggest walling against low level Protoss. This also helps against 2-gate-i-can't-macro-zealot spam.
Protoss have a thousand ways to be damn annoying. Remember that while Terran basically have Bunker Rush and BBS, maybe wraiths, and Zerg only really have early pool and random Hydra Busts as cheese, the Protoss have Storm drops, Fast DT's, Reaver Drops, Recalls, Stases, Zealot Rushes, Cannon Rushes, proxy gateways, and maybe even more ways to be annoying. If you let a good Protoss player catch you off guard, they will slice up your army in a number of ways - be on your guard at all times. Moreover, these ways do not take that much skill - pressing C ever minute or so each time per stargate doesn't seem too hard, but if you let a Carrier fleet build up, you will regret the day you were born. Spamming Z isn't hard either, and neither is building 2 pylons and a cannon behind a mineral line. You catch my drift.
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup. Maybe sprinkle in some fun builds like 1 hatch lurker, or crazy zerg but ling all in kwanro style after 3rd hatch, because losing your first 300 games can get tiresome .
Really you should stick to standard otherwise you will never fully enjoy broodwar. Nothing better than having dead arms and lying back in your chair exhausted after winning a 30min TvP. If you Flash build on cross posi on Fighting Spirit and have learned how to defend against cheese, you are bound to have a good game. My favorite parts of BW was knowing that I invested a lot of effort into having my factories very neatly lined up, so that when carriers came out I could non-stop pump goliaths like crazy, goliaths vs carrier is really fun and intense! Actually Sim City was one of the reasons I love BW, coming up with positions for gateways and pylons so I could macro most effectively. Anyway late game is where BW is really awesome and for every matchup, I love microing defilers, vessels, carriers, and that's where you wanna be if you wanna truly enjoy BW.
Though these probably exist already, you might want to give micro tutorials for specific unit compositions. All build orders are highly dependent on your micro: in order to pull off forge FE or 1rax FE vs a 5pool you need good worker vs ling micro, in order to pull off 3hatch/2hatch muta you need good muta/ling micro, in order to pull off 3hatch lurker you need good lurker/ling micro, in order to do PvT openings you need good goon/obs micro, etc. Not to offend anyone, but SC2 players might not be used to the concept of A-moving, needing to look away for an entire 3 seconds since you don't know what the hotkey for melee upgrades is, and then wondering where your army is. In BW it is quite possible for mines/storm/plague/2lurkers/a reaver/scourge/tanks to just wreck your entire army, and so a properly microed army can easily beat an AFK or even A-moved army, even if the microed army is half the noob army's size.
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
That's it. That is your build. You go 1a2a5sh and you're done microing and macroing. You won't even have enough hydras to beat anything but a computer in all likelihood.
If you are going to do a low econ build for the purposes of not stressing your macro then go 2 or 3 hatch hydra, not 1 base hydras. As a note, macroing is fairly easy as zerg until you fill up 5-0 with hatcheries, my macro doesn't fall apart until I hit that 7th hatchery and I have to go back to my bases to macro up.
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
no, im sorry but just no, this is completely wrong. To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics, yeah you will be able to beat other 60 apm D- players sometimes but never more. That dosent include the fact that it is also atrocious for the learning process as you learn absolutely nothing about the game and pick up a million bad habits with no way to learn decision making because your builds are just retarded compared to what normal players use.
Some builds are exclusively for top players like valkonic but anything you will find on liquipedia or TL is absolutely noob friendly.
I appreciate that you want to help but all you're doing is feeding new BW players complete misinformation and bad learning steps, adding an extra hatch as a layer of complexity to help improve is a really really bad idea...
On a lighter note, Elegant id be happy to help with some guides/vods if you could use any more C level zerg analysis.
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
no, im sorry but just no, this is completely wrong. To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics, yeah you will be able to beat other 60 apm D- players sometimes but never more. That dosent include the fact that it is also atrocious for the learning process as you learn absolutely nothing about the game and pick up a million bad habits with no way to learn decision making because your builds are just retarded compared to what normal players use.
Some builds are exclusively for top players like valkonic but anything you will find on liquipedia or TL is absolutely noob friendly.
I appreciate that you want to help but all you're doing is feeding new BW players complete misinformation and bad learning steps, adding an extra hatch as a layer of complexity to help improve is a really really bad idea...
On a lighter note, Elegant id be happy to help with some guides/vods if you could use any more C level zerg analysis.
Now now. But I believe Ribbon is being too general with the word mechanics.
Strategy matters even at the low level. You will find quite a few low apm C+ players out there, who aren't just robots. Also Zerg macro difficulty remains completely flat until you stop just a-moving units. Its probably the easiest race to macro with compared to other races, its basically like macroing Terran in SC2, do other stuff while going 4sz5sz6sz. Zerg difficulty stems from being effective with units. Zerg macro difficulty also does not scale with the number of hatches, unlike sc2 where a queen needs to manage each hatch.
Simply put theres no reason to stay on 1 hatch as zerg, because macroing off 3 hatches is just as easy.
The other aspects of Zerg are much much harder, you need good unit control and acute awareness. Its very easy to go 3 hatch muta into lose your whole fucking base.
Yes SK Terran is hard, but its not the only build in Liquipedia. The reason noobs like to use it is because its insanely fun. M&M Tank or Mech are much more viable at low apm levels and are completely legit.
The mere fact that this may exist as a tool to get into BW would inspire me to try the game out! Mostly because I feel like I wouldnt know where to start. Even if I didnt switch, I would still want to watch it because I am still interested in the BW pro scene
On June 28 2011 16:58 One wrote: To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics.
(Bold added)
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds. And this scales to pretty high up the ladder. I don't understand why BW fans highlight how important mechanics are and then reject the idea that it can be game-deciding. Obviously, I'm not talking about a pro level, I'm talking about the noob-to-average player who sucks
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
no, im sorry but just no, this is completely wrong. To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics, yeah you will be able to beat other 60 apm D- players sometimes but never more. That dosent include the fact that it is also atrocious for the learning process as you learn absolutely nothing about the game and pick up a million bad habits with no way to learn decision making because your builds are just retarded compared to what normal players use.
Some builds are exclusively for top players like valkonic but anything you will find on liquipedia or TL is absolutely noob friendly.
I appreciate that you want to help but all you're doing is feeding new BW players complete misinformation and bad learning steps, adding an extra hatch as a layer of complexity to help improve is a really really bad idea...
On a lighter note, Elegant id be happy to help with some guides/vods if you could use any more C level zerg analysis.
Now now. But I believe Ribbon is being too general with the word mechanics.
Mechanics = Micro + Macro + Multitasking. The execution, basically.
But low level players who try to do the pro builds AREN'T doing the pro builds, because pro builds don't include "and then get supply blocked a lot and forget to make units half the time". A D level player going the Flash double armory build isn't actually doing the Flash build. He's doing some shitty-ass mech build that has at best a vague resemblance to the Flash build if Flash had a stroke, was drunk, and was also retarded due to brain damage from a freak sucking ass at Starcraft accident. That's why there's no point to it.
The vast majority of people even on ICCUP (myself included, of course) are atrocious. If a D or C level player tries to do a pro build, he's doing it so incompetently that he might as well not be doing it at all.
On June 28 2011 13:50 Magus wrote: The issue with a one base hydra build is this:
5sh
That's it. That is your build. You go 1a2a5sh and you're done microing and macroing. You won't even have enough hydras to beat anything but a computer in all likelihood.
If you are going to do a low econ build for the purposes of not stressing your macro then go 2 or 3 hatch hydra, not 1 base hydras. As a note, macroing is fairly easy as zerg until you fill up 5-0 with hatcheries, my macro doesn't fall apart until I hit that 7th hatchery and I have to go back to my bases to macro up.
just to say u can do 2 hatch hydra on 1 base u dont really need lots of mins/gas
I am relatively interested in this. Brood War looks much more interesting, so I wish to play both games in tandem and maybe make a full blown switch if it really kicks off. Anyways, BW should help with SC2 in a way so I think this is possible. Looking forward to this!
On June 28 2011 16:58 One wrote: To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics.
(Bold added)
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds. And this scales to pretty high up the ladder. I don't understand why BW fans highlight how important mechanics are and then reject the idea that it can be game-deciding. Obviously, I'm not talking about a pro level, I'm talking about the noob-to-average player who sucks
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
no, im sorry but just no, this is completely wrong. To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics, yeah you will be able to beat other 60 apm D- players sometimes but never more. That dosent include the fact that it is also atrocious for the learning process as you learn absolutely nothing about the game and pick up a million bad habits with no way to learn decision making because your builds are just retarded compared to what normal players use.
Some builds are exclusively for top players like valkonic but anything you will find on liquipedia or TL is absolutely noob friendly.
I appreciate that you want to help but all you're doing is feeding new BW players complete misinformation and bad learning steps, adding an extra hatch as a layer of complexity to help improve is a really really bad idea...
On a lighter note, Elegant id be happy to help with some guides/vods if you could use any more C level zerg analysis.
Now now. But I believe Ribbon is being too general with the word mechanics.
Mechanics = Micro + Macro + Multitasking. The execution, basically.
But low level players who try to do the pro builds AREN'T doing the pro builds, because pro builds don't include "and then get supply blocked a lot and forget to make units half the time". A D level player going the Flash double armory build isn't actually doing the Flash build. He's doing some shitty-ass mech build that has at best a vague resemblance to the Flash build if Flash had a stroke, was drunk, and was also retarded due to brain damage from a freak sucking ass at Starcraft accident. That's why there's no point to it.
The vast majority of people even on ICCUP (myself included, of course) are atrocious. If a D or C level player tries to do a pro build, he's doing it so incompetently that he might as well not be doing it at all.
Calm down, D+ players can do standard builds (the same ones that pros use) just fine. I'm D+ and I can do the 3 tank 1 vessel push in TvZ and I don't even play terran. Sure it will be 20 seconds late and my control is terribad, but that can be fixed by doing it again and again, practice they call that. People in low ranks should be improving their mechanics doing the right stuff not wrong stuff. How is practice involving mass hydra vs mm control beneficial to a noobie when he should be learning to engage mm with lurker ling and/or muta ling? I don't see how a guy who macros up and pisses that away with congo line engagements is better than a guy who focuses so hard on control that he screws up his macro.
On June 28 2011 12:57 Ribbon wrote: [...] I was wallowing in D-/E [...]
I have been seeing this a lot lately, mostly on the Star2 forum, people that talk about an E rank, but there is no E rank. I don't think people use it as a metaphor on that they are really bad, but they seem to think there is a rank below D-.
Or, have I been wrong all the time considering that so many Star2 players claim there is?
Glad to see that SC2 players are willing to get off a 'super HQ and HD graphics' game to try a more traditional and super refined BW. About mechanics and strategy, the scale is very different in the two games. I find it stupid when Ribbon mentions the difference between 30 APM and 60 APM. It's a difference of 30 APM, and it's also twice as much. How about the difference between an FvJ where Flash has 370 APM and Jaedong has 400 APM. You think it will affect? Well it's 30 whole APM yo! If you look at the proscene of SC2 and BW, hell any game at all, 'mechanics' is rarely a factor, though it can be, which leads the inexperienced to thinking that, yea in SC2 you need to work on your EAPM just like you do in BW. But the scale is really horribly off. The amount of time the average SC2 pro player has to spend practising to be on par with a BW B- player, if he has never touched BW in his life, is roughly the same as if a B- player were to try SC2, that he has also never touched in his life. Some might argue the SC2 player will need more time. To lead this back to the topic, my point is that if you have multitasking or mechanic based problems in SC2, even in the slightest bit, and I don't care if it's 20 minutes into the game and you're on 6 bases as a zerg, you're going to have a shitton more of such trouble in BW, race irrelevant, for damn sure. edit: @HowardRoark, yea there is an E. I've been at it the very first few times I've tried out '3 hatch muta' off notes on Liquipedia. Took me about 25 tries before I could constantly get the spire down and not have less than 600 minerals/gas or more than 1200 minerals/gas lol. I'd say the top of E or the bottom of D- is about platinum or diamond in SC2 in equivalent with mechanics and game sense.
No, if you have good macro but you aren't playing any FE type of build (1 base shenanigans) then you will straight up lose to any decent D level player. You should have good macro, but off of at least 2 or 3 bases.
And as for strategy, you have to at least know what you are doing. It doesn't help if you can macro off 9 factories and 3 bases but you die because you forget an ebay and DT comes and kills all your SCVs.
Ribbon, SK Terran is a specific type of playstyle. I think most of us are just talking about standard openings (e.g. 1 Rax FE). Pure mechanics might get a player from Bronze to Masters in SC2, but in brood war, I think the best you can get with pure mechanics is D+, possibly C-. Personally I find that if you don't have a solid gameplan or don't know your timings, your mechanics will struggle because you are constantly thinking about what you should do next.
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
I think its better to know you are doing the "right thing" badly, at least you know what your mistakes are, if you lose a game with a solid build you can open the replay and see your mistakes, what are you gonna do with your 1 base hydra played perfectly that loses because the opponent is decent? try again to see if you still got it on you?
If you pick a solid build for each match up, on the long run you will be a better player, unless you get off on seeing your stagnant rank only achieved by cheeses and bad builds, if the goal is to just win instead of improving than its the way to go.
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds.
I think you're confusing strategy with build orders. If you have good mechanics but keep suiciding your units all the time for nothing (as many bad players do), your mechanics are not going to matter much. Knowing when to attack, where to attack, how to stop hidden expos etc etc are all things that make and break games even if you have good mechanics against a player with bad mechanics.
There's no one on this forum who hasn't lost a game, looked at the replay, and seen a player with absolutely terrible mechanics roll them. A lot of D level games could be won just by having the patience to let your opponent do something stupid (instead of rushing to do something stupid yourself). I've lost to players way worse than me just because I was too lazy to think about strategy in a game where I knew my mechanics are loads better. I think above all, the most important thing for low level players is knowing how and when to engage battles (which is a combination of trial and error + replays and being an analytical person who can understand what's going on).
On June 28 2011 12:57 Ribbon wrote: [...] I was wallowing in D-/E [...]
I have been seeing this a lot lately, mostly on the Star2 forum, people that talk about an E rank, but there is no E rank. I don't think people use it as a metaphor on that they are really bad, but they seem to think there is a rank below D-.
Or, have I been wrong all the time considering that so many Star2 players claim there is?
On June 28 2011 12:57 Ribbon wrote: [...] I was wallowing in D-/E [...]
I have been seeing this a lot lately, mostly on the Star2 forum, people that talk about an E rank, but there is no E rank. I don't think people use it as a metaphor on that they are really bad, but they seem to think there is a rank below D-.
ICCUP actually does have an E rank. I've gotten it. It's actually kind of hard to get, which is why you don't see it often (and I imagine people /clearstats at that point).
On June 28 2011 13:50 Magus wrote: The issue with a one base hydra build is this:
5sh
That's it. That is your build. You go 1a2a5sh and you're done microing and macroing. You won't even have enough hydras to beat anything but a computer in all likelihood.
If you are going to do a low econ build for the purposes of not stressing your macro then go 2 or 3 hatch hydra, not 1 base hydras. As a note, macroing is fairly easy as zerg until you fill up 5-0 with hatcheries, my macro doesn't fall apart until I hit that 7th hatchery and I have to go back to my bases to macro up.
I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds.
I think you're confusing strategy with build orders. If you have good mechanics but keep suiciding your units all the time for nothing
...Then you don't actually have good mechanics, do you?
(as many bad players do), your mechanics are not going to matter much. Knowing when to attack, where to attack, how to stop hidden expos etc etc are all things that make and break games even if you have good mechanics against a player with bad mechanics.
And it's so much harder to learn these things when you're also trying to remember a big massive plan. Having a good build will make you win more, but the best way to learn is one thing at a time.
Guys, I think that it was kinda proven that GOOD mechanics > REGULAR strategy by Root.Destiny going mass queens -> Platinum. Yes, he is a pro, but even the dumbest of us do not go mass queen ( or mass hydra in SCBW). But whatever the actual outcome is, LOOK AT THE TOPIC HEAD. This thread is about a guide for SC2 -> BW, NOT a debate over Mechanics v. Strategy. The reason I'm bringing this up is because the last 10 posts or so, while their content is good, are not sticking at all to the topic at hand.
Last thing I am going to say on the topic of builds:
It took me one day to learn 3 base spire into 5 hatch hydra and get it so I could do it perfectly as per the build order given on liquipedia.
-Go into singleplayer, -Pick a map off of iccup (probably fighting spirit, I've been using Circuit Breaker), -As soon as the game starts do your split, type in power overwhelming, set the game speed to fastest, then continue on with your build. -If you make a major mistake press F10 -> E -> R -> R and the game restarts. -Kill the computer when you get 3 or 4 groups of hydras + your initial lings. -Repeat ad nauseum. *If you made it to the end, check the replay afterwards to see what your supply was at 9 minutes. It should be around 85*
I ran through the build like this 20 or 30 times before I could do it more than once a row without screwing up, but it definitely helped, and it definitely wasn't hard to do.
On June 28 2011 16:58 One wrote: To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics.
(Bold added)
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds. And this scales to pretty high up the ladder. I don't understand why BW fans highlight how important mechanics are and then reject the idea that it can be game-deciding. Obviously, I'm not talking about a pro level, I'm talking about the noob-to-average player who sucks
On June 25 2011 07:56 Ribbon wrote: When I got into BW, I played like 500 games copying strategies. Don't do that if you're a noob. Mechanics mechanics mechanics. You can get to Platinum in SC2 making Mass Queen if your mechanics are good enough (RootDestiny did it to prove a point). Mechanics are even more important in BW. Start with really simple build (1 base hydra!) and do it as well as you can. Once you think you're doing it as well as you can, add in another level of complexity (12 hatch into hydra break) etc. I know "copying the pro builds" is the most popular way of playing, and they are the "best" builds, but it's a wasted effort if you have shit mechanics. Once you're good, then you can try good builds. (This is also really as you should improve in SC2 as well, but I don't do it :/)
o_O What?
Just play a race that you like, and stick with the standard build orders against each matchup
The problem is that most people can't. Every time I see a D player go SK Terran, I cry a little inside (and I used to do it myself). You don't have 300 APM. What the hell are you doing?
You start with a simple build so you learn how to play the game. Before I switched to SC2, I had 30 APM. Trying to ape the good build is a complete waste of time, and I was wallowing in D-/E, because I was doing the "proper" things completely incompetently. Then I watched day[9]'s special on mechanics, and now I have 60 APM, go "just make hydras dood" and beat players that used to cream me because my mechanics, while still absolutely shitty next to good people, are better than a lot of D- players who are doing the "proper" thing terribly.
No matter how good your build is, if you're floating 2k minerals 10 minutes into the game and the other guy isn't, you're probably going to lose. It's been proven with the mass queen thing that the bottom 60% of SC2 players can be beaten with mass queens if the opponent's mechanics are solid. It's a fairly agreed-upon point that BW is way way more mechanically intensive than BW.
If you can't macro, that's why you're losing. Even in SC2, and especially in BW
The best way to learn is to do something really simple until your mechanics are good, and then do something a little more complicated, and practice that until you have it down. And eventually dp a pro style build develop your own style. Just trying to do a really complex build your first time loading up the game is intensely frustrating.
I've tried it both ways: Mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>Strategy. Strategy only really matters when both players have good mechanics. If Flash is playing a B- on ICCUP, he can do whatever the hell he wants and win, because his mechanics (which includes micro) will be so much better. If I play enough BW that I'm confortable with my mass hydras, I'll do a slightly better build, like doing a lurker contain while taking a fourth or something like that. That's the proper way to get better, in both games.
no, im sorry but just no, this is completely wrong. To even get out of D you need atleast a liquidpedia build and 100 apm, trying to do stupid builds like mass hydra you will never get above really low D or even D- unless you have C level mechanics, yeah you will be able to beat other 60 apm D- players sometimes but never more. That dosent include the fact that it is also atrocious for the learning process as you learn absolutely nothing about the game and pick up a million bad habits with no way to learn decision making because your builds are just retarded compared to what normal players use.
Some builds are exclusively for top players like valkonic but anything you will find on liquipedia or TL is absolutely noob friendly.
I appreciate that you want to help but all you're doing is feeding new BW players complete misinformation and bad learning steps, adding an extra hatch as a layer of complexity to help improve is a really really bad idea...
On a lighter note, Elegant id be happy to help with some guides/vods if you could use any more C level zerg analysis.
Now now. But I believe Ribbon is being too general with the word mechanics.
Mechanics = Micro + Macro + Multitasking. The execution, basically.
But low level players who try to do the pro builds AREN'T doing the pro builds, because pro builds don't include "and then get supply blocked a lot and forget to make units half the time". A D level player going the Flash double armory build isn't actually doing the Flash build. He's doing some shitty-ass mech build that has at best a vague resemblance to the Flash build if Flash had a stroke, was drunk, and was also retarded due to brain damage from a freak sucking ass at Starcraft accident. That's why there's no point to it.
The vast majority of people even on ICCUP (myself included, of course) are atrocious. If a D or C level player tries to do a pro build, he's doing it so incompetently that he might as well not be doing it at all.
My god, ok first of all if you have the mechanics of a C player, if you used a normal build you would BE C! not some player barley skating above 2000 rating and will never get out of D+ in his life.
2nd of all, doing a terrible build because its easier is the worst thing i ever heard, you dont improve your mechanics faster at all, infact you improve them so slow you might aswell not even be playing, sure it might help you get 60 apm, but i have twice that using only my mouse, any mechanics you gain by using terrible builds for the hell if it you could have improved your mechanics twice as fast using a normal build, plus you actually learn something about the game so you can get out of D+ in your lifetime!
3rd The player who is doing the botched flash armory build is going to be a million times better in a month if he keeps practicing then some guy who went 4 rax academy off 1 base massing marine/medic in every matchup for his first month. Lower levels isnt about winning, its about challenging yourself and improving, yes the guy who went 4 rax acad will beat more D- players in his first week then the other guy but after something around 3 weeks the player who was going double armory will beat players that stomp the guy going 4 rax acad and will have better mechanics and game knowledge and overall be way better then the guy doing a stupid build because he can win more with it for a week.
DO NOT give advice on how to get out of D- if you are a D- player with 60 apm going mass hydra yourself, dont you think people who have been D- players with 60 apm and are now much better players qualify more for that role? all your doing is spreading misinformation among new players that will only stunt their growth and turn them off from BW.
EDIT: your underestimate iccup players so much, any solid D player will win wayyyyy more with a standard build then just going "mass hydras dood". And C players are so much better then you give them credit for i dont think i even need to point it out...
Absolutely, I think a great way to start is doing episodic tutorials on the absolute basics of the game, then maybe move into common build orders and transitions, and then after building up a base start a day9 daily kind of thing with a live stream. Then newcomers can first watch the original recorded episodes and start following the show afterwards.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process. You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
There is a nice thread with a whole bunch of practice maps made by LML. Go find them, open up Fighting Spirit and practice a build. Do nothing but macro as well and as fast as you can, try and keep your minerals below 400-500, and reset whenever you fuck up. You will improve a hell of a lot faster than you will by doing 1 hatch hydra all ins.
On June 29 2011 04:07 djbhINDI wrote: Guys, I think that it was kinda proven that GOOD mechanics > REGULAR strategy by Root.Destiny going mass queens -> Platinum. Yes, he is a pro, but even the dumbest of us do not go mass queen ( or mass hydra in SCBW). But whatever the actual outcome is, LOOK AT THE TOPIC HEAD. This thread is about a guide for SC2 -> BW, NOT a debate over Mechanics v. Strategy. The reason I'm bringing this up is because the last 10 posts or so, while their content is good, are not sticking at all to the topic at hand.
Actually, I think they're quite relevant to the topic at hand. What I've gotten from this discussion is that, in SC2, you can get to Platinum on mechanics alone, even if you're using a shit build that would get you wrecked 100% of the time against a decent player.
In BW, that's true, too. There is a certain level on the iCCup ladder that you can get to by relying on mechanics alone (sticking to four principles: constantly producing probes, constantly producing units, keeping money low, not getting supply blocked). You can get to this point even if you use shit builds like 4 hatch before pool and 1 base 4 rax and 1hatch muta.
The lesson here is that, in BW, that point is low D. If you always do shitty builds, I doubt you're going to consistently stay above 1500. In other words, if you want to get good at BW, you can't just rely on those four principles of macro and hope that you get a lot of wins. You need to go to liquipedia, look up solid build orders for each of the three matchups that you play, and learn them.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy.
I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
As an SC2 player who's been trying out BW, I think it would be helpful to include tips on how to set up your hotkeys, how to move/control large armies effectively (this was really hard as zerg especially), and mechanical things like that, since that's really the hard part of the switch. I can learn strategies and build orders from liquipedia and by watching games, the difficulty is in the mechanical change.
....Yes? If you have better mechanics, you can win with a worse build. That's my point. 60 APM and mass Hydra is better than 30 APM and pro builds.
I think you're confusing strategy with build orders. If you have good mechanics but keep suiciding your units all the time for nothing
...Then you don't actually have good mechanics, do you?
Mechanics are execution right (I believe you said this)? You can have the best mechanics in the world, if you attack into a fortified position with your 1 base hydra because you don't know how to do anything else, then you will lose every game. If you see a fortified position you have to react with either tech or expanding. Those decisions don't have anything to do with mechanics. Suicidal units doesn't necessarily mean 1a. It means engaging in battles (microed well or not) in which you do not trade units efficiently.
Ok. One has been playing BW for 4 months and I have been playing BW for about a year and a half and we are both about the same level. He's C and I'm C-... we go about 50/50 (+he ladders much more then me :p). Excuses aside... I spent over a year of the time playing with no build order... just trying to vaguely mimic what the pros do (I watched pro vods every day). I leave clan wD on west where I used to play alot and come to iccup where I assume I'm gonna be a C+ player and instead get stuck in D+.
The difference? I spent a huge amount of time not learning... just aimlessly trying to do shit that resembles what the pros do while building my mechanics. But as many excellent BW players have said (such as Ver)... mechanics are inherent in builds. You learn them together since each build requires careful maintenance to perform it well. I don't know why you are so vigilant with your belief since so many experienced players disagree with you (troll?).
+ your overreacting to what destiny said. I mean I could say "Oh Jaedong could beat every player on iccup with 12 hat into 2 hatch muta... I'm going to do that every single game no matter what and not pay attention to any strategy until I can pull such a thing off." For god sake learn strategy and mechanics together or your just wasting your time.
BTW two things I did that were helpful when I was just starting out. During the early game go back and fourth between clicking on the cc and the mins in order to get used to the distance between them (making pulling scv's to mine a much faster process I shit u not). Also going into notepad and practicing ur hotkeys is a good way to learn them quickly.
As a Zerg player, the advice I would give to anyone is to have paper clued to the side of your monitor to constantly reminds you to "produce overlord", "remember to macro" and "follow the hotkeys"
Everyone have different hotkey setup to suit their own needs. Just keep on playing and you'll find your very own hotkey setup optimal to you, that takes the least amount of time to do things. Once you have found your optimal hotkeys (after 30 games or so), you should write them down and worship them like a religion. Once you are able to comfortably use the hotkey, then its macro time. Make sure that you utilize EVERY single larvaes you have on each hatch and try getting the hatchery timing right.
Hatchery Timing: there will be a time when after the initial push/attack/build order completes AND that you find yourself to be using all the available larvaes from your hatheries, you will have a large sum of money left over, so try getting the hatchery timing right so that you can produce with the extra larvaes into a unit and keeping your money low. Another thing to add is to make sure you've got the right worker/unit combinations such as maintaining map presence and have a healthy economy. This is the reason why Zerg need an extra base because it is very difficult to both of that. But the timing of producing drones only and other attacking units is crucial that will be able to develop through playing and game sense. This is pretty much the hardest part of being a Zerg player as for mid-game play because if you can't do the balance out the worker/unit combinations, you will fall for late game (because of bad econ) or fail against timing pushes (that is you have less unit to defend).
REMEMBER only until you get the timing right with your hatcheries and drone production timing right, you will start taking care of your micro. Otherwise, you should be able to get to D+ with no problem by following above.
Also forget all that negative shit about how bad it is to "play like a robot". You want to execute ur builds perfectly and have a preconceived game-plan that takes into account the variate of things your opponents can do.
Trust me there is nothing more satisfying than building for yourself an effective and consistent method to dismantle your opponent.
On June 29 2011 09:51 puppykiller wrote: The difference? I spent a huge amount of time not learning... just aimlessly trying to do shit that resembles what the pros do while building my mechanics. But as many excellent BW players have said (such as Ver)... mechanics are inherent in builds. You learn them together since each build requires careful maintenance to perform it well. I don't know why you are so vigilant with your belief since so many experienced players disagree with you (troll?).
Personal experience. I tried learning strategies, and I was an abject failure.
Then I played SC2, during which I was exposed to the concept of mechanics mechanics mechanics, and I brought that mindset back to me when I started playing BW again, to notably better results.
I dunno. Maybe I gained a game sense in SC2 that carries over to BW more than I think it does. Maybe I'm just weird. I think I went from one extreme (strategy only!) to the other (mechanics only!). Bluh. Whatever. I suppose I shouldn't talk, because I'm terribad at both games. I'll just stick to throwing money in holes.
On June 29 2011 09:51 puppykiller wrote: The difference? I spent a huge amount of time not learning... just aimlessly trying to do shit that resembles what the pros do while building my mechanics. But as many excellent BW players have said (such as Ver)... mechanics are inherent in builds. You learn them together since each build requires careful maintenance to perform it well. I don't know why you are so vigilant with your belief since so many experienced players disagree with you (troll?).
Personal experience. I tried learning strategies, and I was an abject failure.
Then I played SC2, during which I was exposed to the concept of mechanics mechanics mechanics, and I brought that mindset back to me when I started playing BW again, to notably better results.
I dunno. Maybe I gained a game sense in SC2 that carries over to BW more than I think it does. Maybe I'm just weird. I think I went from one extreme (strategy only!) to the other (mechanics only!). Bluh. Whatever. I suppose I shouldn't talk, because I'm terribad at both games. I'll just stick to throwing money in holes.
Thanks for throwing money in the hole! Remind me of this incase i ever try to be mean to you lol. But seriusly if you want to get good just come online more. Play like the rest of us so u dont have to be one of those guys who has to convince people they know what there talking about without anything to back it up.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
You have too much of an SC2 perspective. Sure, your method of training would be effective in the tiered league system of SC2. However this is BW. You can't just learn stuff in stages, you HAVE to jump in head first. 'Learning' how to macro off of 1 base in PvZ is totally useless because in a real game you would never ever be in a situation where it would be required. The best way to improve is to focus on a single, solid build, and learn from there. Here is a quote from Ver's guide on how to improve:
First, one build at a time. Until you can get one build down subconsciously, don't even bother with anything else, you'll just make it worse. Thus it is of great importance that you choose a good build to emulate.
I don't see the point in restricting yourself to a build that you are never going to use once you know something about the game. What is the point? The build is both bad and useless and teaches you nothing about the game either strategically or mechanically.
In my opinion you either try to learn everything at once or you try to learn nothing and first just get used to the game.
Either try to do everything right right away and develop all the proper habits and play all the proper strategies right away. Or just go do random 3vs3 hunters games for 200 games and then go to 1vs1 using the first method.
Obviously one is going to be more successful than the other.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
You have too much of an SC2 perspective. Sure, your method of training would be effective in the tiered league system of SC2. However this is BW.
That has nothing to do with BW vs SC2, it's ICCUP vs Bnet. ICCUP is not even the tiniest bit noob-friendly. It's sink or swim, and most people sink
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
You have too much of an SC2 perspective. Sure, your method of training would be effective in the tiered league system of SC2. However this is BW.
That has nothing to do with BW vs SC2, it's ICCUP vs Bnet. ICCUP is not even the tiniest bit noob-friendly. It's sink or swim, and most people sink
Ladder can be hostile.. but there a lots of really inexperienced players... you just have to make friends with them and they will practice with you. Also other players will help you. Come to op teamliquid ^^
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
You have too much of an SC2 perspective. Sure, your method of training would be effective in the tiered league system of SC2. However this is BW.
That has nothing to do with BW vs SC2, it's ICCUP vs Bnet. ICCUP is not even the tiniest bit noob-friendly. It's sink or swim, and most people sink
Ladder can be hostile.. but there a lots of really inexperienced players... you just have to make friends with them and they will practice with you. Also other players will help you. Come to op teamliquid ^^
I'm technically in the ICCUP Training Program clan!
Though, honestly, it never helped me much , because I never heard the phrase I needed to hear: You have 30 APM and you're floating a small fortune.
What are the simplest non-silly builds for each matchup, to start with?
ZvP = 3 base Spire into 5 hatch hydra OR 5 hatch before gas OR turtle with lurker ling on 4 base 6 hatcheries (which I don't have the build order for) *3 base Spire into 5 hatch hydra was standard, might be worth it to learn the 5 hatch before gas now
The most problematic part of BW for SC2 players is spending 45 minutes waiting to do a game with a "proper" build and getting bunker rushed on your ramp >.
A close second is spending 10 minutes finding a game where a probe blocks your hatch for 2 full minutes because you can't micro BW's tard workers.
I think, and I'm entirely serious and not just venting, that a lesson in worker micro is a necessity, because if you can't micro as Zerg, probes are more powerful than your whole race, and strategy is pointless. (Which isn't a balance whine, I just suck, etc etc)
Anyway. *Cough*.
Let's get back on topic. (But I did win a game against a Terran because I had lurkers and he apparently didn't know science vessels detected!)
What should the series of videos look like, in order? Maybe something like
1. A brief overview of Brood War. Really basic stuff, like what introductions to the units. Carriers are good. Arbiters are jailbait motherships. Stim is effectively free with medics. Etc.
2. How to make a game. Like 80% of ICCUP apparently doesn't know how to host, and no way SC2 players will be able to figure out you need to fuck with your router without being told because that's stupid. Also, basic ICCUP knowledge like "If you have to download a map, the guy's probably cheating" and "Don't play people with the antihack disabled"
3. Mechanics. Day[9]'s overview of SC2's mechanics ran 2-3 hours, so BW's should be a miniseries, really, because BW is more of a micro/macro game.
4. How not to die in the first five minutes because jesus fuck i hate everything and everyone that has ever existed or will exists probes are so bullshit jegus gog.
5. Basic builds.
6. Base Layout
7. How to scout, and what to look for, by matchup.
Ribbon, what do you spend that 45 minutes on? Just forward your ports. T___T I can find games in a matter of couple of minutes at most, usually it's about half a minute.
This will be useful. Give us some good pointers so we can start flooding ICCup with games.
Played first game on ICCup yesterday, got 2-3 as protoss. Too bad the 2 win are not in my record. The level difference is just huge, and to win in BW is just way more rewarding.
PvT going 1gate FE (have to learn obs timing), PvZ Forge FE (again have to learn obs timing) and PvP going 1 gate core into 2 gate reaver, trying harass. Choosing a build and trying to execute is the easy part, the real problem is: mechanics and scouting information. I've been watching BW for a year now, but I can't translate anything I see into good pointers for what the other player is doing. Today I just know that early lair will probably mean mutas lol
If you make a game on iccup on a motw map or popular non-motw map, someone will join often in 10 seconds no matter what time in the world. 45 minutes? wtf
I recommend anyone that is struggling with the learning curve to play only protoss. No matter what any protoss player may thing, protoss has a learning curve completely different from that of zerg and especially terran. With protoss you can quickly get D+ and C- whereas with Z and T it will take you 4x or more as many games to do so. SC BW is a better game than SC2 but it was one weakness. It isn't as balanced as SC2. Blizzard never tried to even balance SC BW. It is only balanced at progamer level in Korea by Kespa through maps.
Then the main thing is mechanics. You need to get this right right away or else you will develop bad habits.
Then, play safe macro oriented builds. You are going to have to play without trying to get a strategic edge. Theoretically you want to outexpand your opponent in PvP, for example. Instead, decide to lose a bit of an advantage on all these risk management decisions.
In PvT, almost always use 2 gate observer, for example. Don't do 12 nexus builds or 1 gate 3 nexus builds, etc.
PvZ, always FE into corsair scout.
These builds are to make things strategically easy and to focus on laying a good foundation. You can't play strategically if you don't understand the strategy. And strategy is far from obvious.
The big challenge here is to stop all the cheeses and allins that interrupt and prevent you from executing your set build.
Doing a DT build properly will get you to C- fast. But this is just throwing dice. You can just as well throw a few real dice and then call yourself a C- protoss player. Who cares? Same can be done with 4pool, but DT builds are way more solid when it doesn't insta win.
Compare your first minutes to the perfect play of progamers. You can lose only a few seconds. Check the supply of your games that unfold exactly the same way with progamers. Top foreigner amateurs isn't good enough because unlike in SC2, there's a huge gap between them. At first you can check the first 4 minutes. But after a time you want to be only a few seconds and a bit of supply behind even for 11 minutes, in a macro game.
Get a practice partner from who you will lose 70% of the time. These are the best. 50/50 isn't good enough. You want to lose because you want to play someone who is better. She or he will fix the gaps in your game by exploiting them and making you lose. But it won't be a rofl stop because you will win at some point. Now in SC2 you will have 70% chance to win because of luck/cheese/randomness against players that rofl stomp you. But in SC BW it is different. The games will be won through strategic knowledge or mechanics.
Get a teacher. If you are really low level getting a teacher is helpful.
Iccup at E ranks I think will be extremely soft. Much softer than random people on bnet, who are hackers anyway. I see such weak players at D level sometimes. E level must be a lot of clueless and complete beginners.
If anyone wants some lessons, I think I can give some advice to below D and D protoss and terrans to help them improve their game. I think I can lay a really good foundation for players that are starting out and willing to learn. I am not a top player but I have given the pedagogy of SC BW a little thought. I also have a good practice UMS somewhere that I made years ago with an iccup friend. But I prefer to do the 100% serious result oriented advice. Therefore, for some people I do agree with what Testie once recommended. Go do a bunch of 3vs3 hunters games. I think many people like Idra actually come from fast money maps. For some reason, many people weren't initially interested in standard 1vs1 on progamer maps.
So yes, I think guidance is a lot more important in SC BW. In SC2 you can just jump on the ladder and go 50/50. On iccup you will always go 33/66. And just jumping into the D ranks on iccup knowing nothing won't do you any good. No actually, maybe it will. But there is a lot of risk for bad habits and reactionary play. I guess not so much for SC2 people than for complete new people. But sometimes you see people who start to play completely defensive and passive and are only playing to not lose in the first 5 minutes and develop a completely wrong and weak strategical approach to the game. This is because they were too reactionary after misidentifying why they lost. If you play the correct build without the mechanics, you will lose. The solution is not to change the build, but to keep losing exactly that way until it doesn't happen anymore. A very counter intuitive approach. And this is also why a teacher can help so much.
I am in EU time zone and it's summer holiday. I can help out 3 people at max. No zergs, sorry. So pm me if interested.
On June 29 2011 03:50 Ribbon wrote: I actually go 2 base hydra into 3 base hydra. I'm not saying "one base hydra is a good build". It's not. I'm saying you should do it until you feel you can't do it any better, then improve the build to make it more complicated. Once you've got 1a2a5sh down and you're not getting supply blocked or anything, you change your build so that so FE and go 1a2a3a4sh5sh. Once I feel I've mastered that, I'll add another lair of complexity (lurker contain, probably), and on and on and on. Eventually, if I play enough to feel comfortable in my mechanics, I'll take up a pro level build.
You don't do it because it's good, you do it because it's simple. It's easier to learn starcraft one thing at a time, and once you've mastered one thing, do another. When you can look at a replay, and honestly go "I did nothing wrong, I only lost because my build sucked and not because I executed it perfectly", you can improve the build.
seriously dude, what kind of advice is this? It doesn't matter how well you can mass hydras off 2 hatch and all in, you will NEVER go anywhere. As other people have said, all you are doing is slowing down your own learning process.
It's pro advice.
From the mass queen VOD
Destiny (Paraphrased): If you're below diamond and you're asking for lessons, this is how are lessons are going to go. I'm going to say "Here, try this simple one-base build" like one-base roach. And once you feel like you can't do it any better, I'll say "Now make it a little more complicated; add in an expansion". And if you do that well, you'll be in diamond, and then we can start talking about strategy. I swapped out the word "Roach" and replaced it with "Hydra".
Day[9] takes I guess a more middle of the road view, but is also about mastering one thing before doing another. He tells you to do the "right" build but only focus on making the right buildings. And once you're done with that, start focusing on maintaining constant unit production. Or something along those lines.
This isn't even really a "mechanics vs strategy" thing. My belief is that you should focus on mechanics, and then start focusing on strategy, rather than trying to learn everything all at once. I spent like a week just focusing on not looking at my base (and using hotkeys) after Day[9]'s mechanics daily, and it gold me out of gold.
Why does it apply to SC2 and not BW?
You don't start by doing retarded builds, you start with a general build (1 rax FE, 3 hatch into 5 base, forge FE, etc) and then improve your mechanics while doing that. That way in addition to learning how to macro and multitask, information you glean from watching pro games is actually relevant.
You say "start with a general build and work from there" I say "start with a simple build and work from there".
It's actually not that big of a difference, I think.
1 rax FE is not a difficult build. Neither is forge FE. They are both simple, and yet are also the most effective choices for all players. You are giving basic pro strategies way too much credit.
Maybe you can just stay off ICCUP entirely until you've mastered "making stuff on one base" and have moved to "making stuff off two bases", and play a bunch of games against the computer just practicing your build.
I probably shouldn't have used Zerg as an example, because BW Zerg has the easiest macro of both games. Maybe Protoss just practicing maintaining constant probe production, not getting supply-blocked, and making gateway units off once base. And then once he's got that down, he can go forge FE, make probes out of two Nexi, and make gateway units out of the right number of gateways. And when he's got THAT down, he can start getting upgrades and go on ICCUP.
You have too much of an SC2 perspective. Sure, your method of training would be effective in the tiered league system of SC2. However this is BW.
That has nothing to do with BW vs SC2, it's ICCUP vs Bnet. ICCUP is not even the tiniest bit noob-friendly. It's sink or swim, and most people sink
Iccup is super friendly unless you're hardcore laddering. Last BW session I played a C+ (Im D) and he rolled me like 7 games in a row. But he went over reps with me after each one to tell me where Im lacking and questioning my decision making. Its helps a ton more to challenge yourself then to learn from the numerous mistakes you'll make then to 1base everything cause "macro is hard!!!"
On June 29 2011 23:00 Hekisui wrote: SC BW is a better game than SC2 but it was one weakness. It isn't as balanced as SC2. Blizzard never tried to even balance SC BW. It is only balanced at progamer level in Korea by Kespa through maps.
Nice to see this thread becoming useful in a number of ways
Sorry episode one is taking a while- I want to be sure that once the first one has been put up, I can consistently manage more in pretty short timeframes.
I just felt bad for this guy- he means well, but some crucial information is missing
SC BW is a better game than SC2 but it was one weakness. It isn't as balanced as SC2. Blizzard never tried to even balance SC BW. It is only balanced at progamer level in Korea by Kespa through maps
The stats balancing Blizzard did on SC BW doesn't compare to anything Blizzard has done on SC2. What they did is only fix game breaking things. You can actually roll back many stat changes and have a different map pool and the game would be just as balanced. When Kespa makes their maps they don't look at balance for lower level players at all. Those map stats are meaningless. We actually have these stats because I asked for iccup if they could pull them out of their database. But they can only be used comparing one map to another map. Not one race with another race. We all know that players start out playing protoss and switch to other races later. It skewers the result to compare the average protoss player with the average terran or zerg player because they are not equal.
SC BW being a balanced game is myth and dogma. SC BW is full of overpowered units and abilities. Lurkers can kill so many marines so fast. Marines can kill so many zerglings with stim and medics. Attacking across a minefield into siege tanks is suicide. Spider mines can kill so many units so quickly. Macroing is suddenly so easy if you can make ultras. Cracklings kill buildings so insanely fast. All these things would be different if you redesign a game from scratch since now we know about something called competitive RTS. And in fact, we don't see this in SC2, despite people complaining about hard counters. SC BW, because of lack of balance, has way more and stronger hard counters than SC2.
It's funny you felt the need to link to Othello, an obscure unpopular map out of place in that list, which is one of the few maps where terran is strong because of the terrain. Still, there's plenty of maps with 40% or 60% for one race with a large enough sample size. Anything not 49 or 51 is actually a big difference.
In fact, terran is stronger on most Blizzard maps. Map balance has nothing to do with the learning curve of a race and with the statistical potential and strength of a race.
SC BW has many things that would be instantly patched if they happened in SC2. Dark Swarm is just one example.
I hope a person with the name 'ImbaToss' who does not understand balance isn't going to get corrected too hard.
Making a video series for new players has been tried before. It doesn't really work. AT least, it didn't do so back then.
On June 30 2011 03:27 Hekisui wrote: The stats balancing Blizzard did on SC BW doesn't compare to anything Blizzard has done on SC2. What they did is only fix game breaking things. You can actually roll back many stat changes and have a different map pool and the game would be just as balanced. When Kespa makes their maps they don't look at balance for lower level players at all. Those map stats are meaningless. We actually have these stats because I asked for iccup if they could pull them out of their database. But they can only be used comparing one map to another map. Not one race with another race. We all know that players start out playing protoss and switch to other races later. It skewers the result to compare the average protoss player with the average terran or zerg player because they are not equal.
SC BW being a balanced game is myth and dogma. SC BW is full of overpowered units and abilities. Lurkers can kill so many marines so fast. Marines can kill so many zerglings with stim and medics. Attacking across a minefield into siege tanks is suicide. Spider mines can kill so many units so quickly. Macroing is suddenly so easy if you can make ultras. Cracklings kill buildings so insanely fast. All these things would be different if you redesign a game from scratch since now we know about something called competitive RTS. And in fact, we don't see this in SC2, despite people complaining about hard counters. SC BW, because of lack of balance, has way more and stronger hard counters than SC2.
It's funny you felt the need to link to Othello, an obscure unpopular map out of place in that list, which is one of the few maps where terran is strong because of the terrain. Still, there's plenty of maps with 40% or 60% for one race with a large enough sample size. Anything not 49 or 51 is actually a big difference.
In fact, terran is stronger on most Blizzard maps. Map balance has nothing to do with the learning curve of a race and with the statistical potential and strength of a race.
SC BW has many things that would be instantly patched if they happened in SC2. Dark Swarm is just one example.
I hope a person with the name 'ImbaToss' who does not understand balance isn't going to get corrected too hard.
Making a video series for new players has been tried before. It doesn't really work. AT least, it didn't do so back then.
If you don't post wrong things then others won't feel the need to post corrections. I am not hating on SC BW. I am just telling people the truth. SC BW isn't some magically perfect game.
If you want to know if SC BW is balanced on all skill levels, go ask the strongest foreign SC BW player we had. I strongly dislike Blizzard. But what they are doing trying to balance SC2 is so much more advanced than what was done in SC BW. People shouldn't be tricked into playing SC BW over SC2 because it is more balanced because it isn't. And games don't balance themselves, despite what Day9 wants people to believe.
If David Kim and his team was told to balance SC BW, using the methods, logic and reasoning they use on SC2, they would change a lot of things.
Fact remains that if macroing, multiasking and microing is too hard for new players when switching to SC BW, protoss is the best race to start with because it is much easier and much more forgiving. This has been known for years and for years we as the SC BW community have recommended new people to start with protoss first and then switch to the race they want to play later.
After all the bad posts we had from Ribbon, you are going to try to derail this in a balance debate because of the truths I have said?
This is supposed to be a thread about helping players switch from SC2 to BW not a discussion about how you feel balance works at amateur level. Even if Ribbon's posts are were misguided they were at least aimed at assisting new players improve their mechanics.
I really don't see what the point of discussing race balance at this level is anyway since the level of a player new to BW is joining at the better player is almost always going to win regardless of race.
If you don't post wrong things then others won't feel the need to post corrections. I am not hating on SC BW. I am just telling people the truth. SC BW isn't some magical perfect game.
If you want to know if SC BW is balanced on all skill levels, go ask the strongest foreign SC BW player we had. I strongly dislike Blizzard. But what they are doing trying to balance SC2 is so much more advanced than what was done in SC BW. People shouldn't be tricked into playing SC BW over SC2 because it is more balanced because it isn't. And games don't balance themselves, despite what Day9 wants people to believe.
Fact remains that if macroing, multiasking and microing is too hard for them when switching to SC BW, protoss is the best race to start with because it is much easier and much more forgiving. This has been known for years and for years we have recommended new people to start with protoss first and then which to the race they want to play.
After all the bad posts we had from Ribbon, you are going to try to derail this in a balance debate because of the truths I have said?
Are you implying that your assertions are somehow not derailing the thread? Your "truths" lack backing up. And all your examples of "overpowered" things in BW are quite poor in supporting your argument. "No it should be OK walking to a tank line through a mine field, tanks are immobile as hell, let us make them useless in positional play too!" or "let's lower crackling dps so they become useless lategame". I mean seriously? Sounds like your ultimate balanced game should have no units with no abilities doing nothing.
OK. Your underlying argument is "BW is not balanced in sub pro levels". I give you FS played by people in iccup 51% 49.28% 47% from almost 35k games. Now to me this sure as hell breaks your "truths", if you disagree, please, elaborate. Oh and if you consider those statistics imbalanced feel free to give examples of superior balance.
EDIT: @Pifualkd: I agree that this is no place for this kind of discussion, however, the scenario where new people come to this thread and find some spouting how everything in BW is overpowered, imbalanced and should be patched go unchallenged makes me sick.
If you want to have a balance discussion, go make a new threat. There you can ask what it actually means for stats to be 51% 49.28% 47% on FS.
Problem is, everyone knowledgeable who knows English either left the SC community or is playing SC2. I suggest you do a search instead because both balance, map balance, iccup stats and all the examples I gave are already discussed.
I made just 2 lines on the myth of perfect SC BW balance in my whole post, trying to help new players and offering help. You stopped reading the post there and then, you claim.
Your last line asking me for a map with stats nearer to 50% on iccup exactly shows how dishonest you are anyway about this whole debate and you are just argumentative for the sake of arguing.
Stop shitting up this thread.
[edit]
I never said SC BW should be patched. Don't be a liar. I said similar things would be patched in SC2. This is pretty much a fact since Blizzard has made balance patches because of how things went in both the lower bronze leagues and the team matches.
On June 30 2011 04:14 Hekisui wrote: If you want to have a balance discussion, go make a new threat. There you can ask what it actually means for stats to be 51% 49.28% 47% on FS.
Problem is, everyone knowledgeable who knows English either left the SC community or is playing SC2. I suggest you do a search instead because both balance, map balance, iccup stats and all the examples I gave are already discussed.
I made just 2 lines on the myth of perfect SC BW balance in my whole post, trying to help new players and offering help. You stopped reading the post there and then, you claim.
Your last line asking me for a map with stats nearer to 50% on iccup exactly shows how dishonest you are anyway about this whole debate and you are just argumentative for the sake of arguing.
Stop shitting up this thread.
Jeadong knows English.
No I'm asking for stats closer to 50% in this superiorly balanced game you are promoting.
Stop shitting up this thread.
You made your bullshit claims, I challenged them to make sure that people who are unaware don't mistake them for consensus opinion. If you really care for the quality of the thread, don't reply.
EDIT: It seems you don't care. But I do and I've already made my point, so that is over with. I'm sure you'll be fine on your own.
Jaedong doesn't know enough English to do a balance debate. And he doesn't post here anyway. So stop being an outright liar.
I don't care what you ask for. It's a loaded and question with only meaningless answers. And even without all that, it is still an attempt at a straw man argument.
I made bullshit claims? You admit you don't even read my complete posts.
I have the very strong feeling you are very new to this community. I don't think you have the right to decide what has been the consensus in this community when you weren't even here most of the time.
I'm asking, everyone, please don't get this thread closed. Open a new thread for offtpic fresh debates etc, I'm all for that. As far as we're concerned on the balance issue, it is 100% indisputably possible for any player from E to olympic standard, to crush another player, in any matchup, if they play a stronger game.
This is where guides etc come in: you can win. You must learn how.
Both games are balanced at a pro level (Edit: And on Pro Maps. I imagine BW's balance is screwy on the official Blizzard ladder maps no one plays). People made charts and stuff for thousands of pro SC2 games and found all matchups balanced since April. No one needs to do that for BW because it's been around so long that the fact of it's balance is apparent and obvious to all.
Both games have, by design, lots of things that feel like OP bullshit, but if you can't counter it with your own race's OP BS, then you're just not good enough. Deal with it. Vent if you must (lord knows I do), but deal with it and play again.
In BW ZvP, a Dark Templar can walk into your mineral line and kill all your drones without an alert sound. That's ludicrous. Deal with it and pay attention to your bases.
In SC2 ZvP, a speed overlord with upgraded banelings can fly over your mineral lines, and by the time the alert sounds the Zerg will score 30 worker kills. Deal with it and pay attention to your minimap.
BW ZvT: Dark Swarm makes units immune to nearly all terran units. L2Micro.
SC2 ZvT: A player can marauder drop your main and kill all your tech super-fast while attacking on the other side of the map. L2Multitask.
BW: Lurkers can kill infinity marines if the Terran has bad micro
SC2: Infestors and Banelings can kill nigh-infinity marines if the Terran doesn't split.
BW: Reaver drops
SC2: Blue flame hellion drops (or baneling drops)
BW: "Vultures have zero build time and are free"
SC2: "Banshees are ranged DTs that fly"
BW: Probes can delay a hatch for like ten minutes because drone AI keeps forgetting about them
SC2: "You're protoss. You have buildings better than my race"
Etc etc etc. Learn to deal with it and win. Both games are balanced, in large part thanks to the maps they're played on in tournaments, and on private ladders like ICCUP (BW) and NTBL (SC2).
No whining. No tears. No regrets. Go forth and win with your imba units, as I go forth and win with mine.
On June 30 2011 06:46 Ribbon wrote: Both games are balanced at a pro level (Edit: And on Pro Maps. I imagine BW's balance is screwy on the official Blizzard ladder maps no one plays). People made charts and stuff for thousands of pro SC2 games and found all matchups balanced since April. No one needs to do that for BW because it's been around so long that the fact of it's balance is apparent and obvious to all.
Both games have, by design, lots of things that feel like OP bullshit, but if you can't counter it with your own race's OP BS, then you're just not good enough. Deal with it. Vent if you must (lord knows I do), but deal with it and play again.
In BW ZvP, a Dark Templar can walk into your mineral line and kill all your drones without an alert sound. That's ludicrous. Deal with it and pay attention to your bases.
In SC2 ZvP, a speed overlord with upgraded banelings can fly over your mineral lines, and by the time the alert sounds the Zerg will score 30 worker kills. Deal with it and pay attention to your minimap.
BW ZvT: Dark Swarm makes units immune to nearly all terran units. L2Micro.
SC2 ZvT: A player can marauder drop your main and kill all your tech super-fast while attacking on the other side of the map. L2Multitask.
BW: Lurkers can kill infinity marines if the Terran has bad micro
SC2: Infestors and Banelings can kill nigh-infinity marines if the Terran doesn't split.
BW: Reaver drops
SC2: Blue flame hellion drops (or baneling drops)
BW: "Vultures have zero build time and are free"
SC2: "Banshees are ranged DTs that fly"
BW: Probes can delay a hatch for like ten minutes because drone AI keeps forgetting about them
SC2: "You're protoss. You have buildings better than my race"
Etc etc etc. Learn to deal with it and win. Both games are balanced, in large part thanks to the maps they're played on in tournaments, and on private ladders like ICCUP (BW) and NTBL (SC2).
No whining. No tears. No regrets. Go forth and win with your imba units, as I go forth and win with mine.
I want to respond to this but It's just gonna derail the thread into an sc2 vs BW argument about which game takes more skill.
Now get the fuck online and play. Experience cures misconceptions (some of these comparisons dont really function the way you think they do), so if you... and yes I mean you Ribbon, don't play at-least 10 games today.... i'm not going to take you seriously anymore and just assume your hobby is not sc but instead whining.
op Sgs and op teamliquid are great channels for noobs. Sgs actually has scheduled practice times and is filled with players E- to C-. There mission is to help people reach C- level.
Who cares if you cant find people the second you get online, you will find them with a little bit of effort (much less effort than it actually takes to improve in either sc2 or BW). If you are completely unable to find anyone to play with... msg me, I play alot on puppy(OD).
On June 30 2011 06:46 Ribbon wrote: Both games are balanced at a pro level (Edit: And on Pro Maps. I imagine BW's balance is screwy on the official Blizzard ladder maps no one plays). People made charts and stuff for thousands of pro SC2 games and found all matchups balanced since April. No one needs to do that for BW because it's been around so long that the fact of it's balance is apparent and obvious to all.
Both games have, by design, lots of things that feel like OP bullshit, but if you can't counter it with your own race's OP BS, then you're just not good enough. Deal with it. Vent if you must (lord knows I do), but deal with it and play again.
In BW ZvP, a Dark Templar can walk into your mineral line and kill all your drones without an alert sound. That's ludicrous. Deal with it and pay attention to your bases.
In SC2 ZvP, a speed overlord with upgraded banelings can fly over your mineral lines, and by the time the alert sounds the Zerg will score 30 worker kills. Deal with it and pay attention to your minimap.
BW ZvT: Dark Swarm makes units immune to nearly all terran units. L2Micro.
SC2 ZvT: A player can marauder drop your main and kill all your tech super-fast while attacking on the other side of the map. L2Multitask.
BW: Lurkers can kill infinity marines if the Terran has bad micro
SC2: Infestors and Banelings can kill nigh-infinity marines if the Terran doesn't split.
BW: Reaver drops
SC2: Blue flame hellion drops (or baneling drops)
BW: "Vultures have zero build time and are free"
SC2: "Banshees are ranged DTs that fly"
BW: Probes can delay a hatch for like ten minutes because drone AI keeps forgetting about them
SC2: "You're protoss. You have buildings better than my race"
Etc etc etc. Learn to deal with it and win. Both games are balanced, in large part thanks to the maps they're played on in tournaments, and on private ladders like ICCUP (BW) and NTBL (SC2).
No whining. No tears. No regrets. Go forth and win with your imba units, as I go forth and win with mine.
I want to respond to this but It's just gonna derail the thread into an sc2 vs BW argument about which game takes more skill.
Now get the fuck online and play. Experience cures misconceptions (some of these comparisons dont really function the way you think they do), so if you... and yes I mean you Ribbon, don't play at-least 10 games today.... i'm not going to take you seriously anymore and just assume your hobby is not sc but instead whining.
op Sgs and op teamliquid are great channels for noobs. Sgs actually has scheduled practice times and is filled with players E- to C-. There mission is to help people reach C- level.
Who cares if you cant find people the second you get online, you will find them with a little bit of effort (much less effort than it actually takes to improve in either sc2 or BW). If you are completely unable to find anyone to play with... msg me, I play alot on puppy(OD).
What?
I'm not whining at all. Nor am I comparing the games. The entire point of my post was "The game is balanced, you're just bad, so shut the fuck up and practice". Which...seems to be your point as well, so I'm confused. I'm not even making comparisons, really, I'm just cherry-picking things I hear noobs whine about, including noobs like me who loathe probes.
On June 29 2011 15:44 Magus wrote: TvZ = 1 rax FE into 9 minute push
TvP = Siege expand into stuff (not a Terran )
TvT = Stuff...
ZvT = 3 Hatch Muta into 3rd base into Hive
ZvP = 3 base Spire into 5 hatch hydra OR 5 hatch before gas OR turtle with lurker ling on 4 base 6 hatcheries (which I don't have the build order for) *3 base Spire into 5 hatch hydra was standard, might be worth it to learn the 5 hatch before gas now
ZvZ = 12pool gas or 9pool gas
PvT = 2 gate Obs
PvP = 2 gate reaver/Obs?
PvZ = +1 Speedlot
Is this a good list of standard builds I can run to help my mechanics?
If you don't have the ability to open ports on your router (grumble grumble), what's the best way to actually play the goddamn game? I don't see Op Teamliquid in the channel list, and the D channel is...and the ICCUP Training Program clan room is my own little Forever Aloneatorium.
I think it's also good to have a few anecdotes about pro BW players so the viewer can get attached to certain personalities in the game. To be honest, I played BW from the start but I didn't really like the pro-scene until I saw Boxer, and more importantly, when I started reading about him. LR threads and battle reports and interviews are a great way to pique interest on a personal level.
The pro-scene is what it is in Korea because it's more than the game. What lies beyond becomes equally important, because that's how you maintain your passion.
And as to the game, it also helps to have an ideal, a model to hold up for your standard of play. For example, I am forever inspired when I play Terran because when I watch Flash play, I always hold myself to try to reach his standard. It makes the game more fun (and gives me a good laugh when I get zergling rushed and manage to defend it - I imagine that I'm fighting Kwanro).
I'm just cherry-picking things I hear noobs whine about, including noobs like me who loathe probes.
Ok just so you stop mentioning it, go overpool ZvP, problems solved. (overpool is by far the best opening to use as a standard in that matchup anyways)
On June 30 2011 14:54 Ribbon wrote: If you don't have the ability to open ports on your router (grumble grumble), what's the best way to actually play the goddamn game? I don't see Op Teamliquid in the channel list, and the D channel is...and the ICCUP Training Program clan room is my own little Forever Aloneatorium.
Ok, so I've been a BW player for some time I may have some tips for starters.
Firstly race difficulty for starters: Easy: Protoss Medium: Zerg Hard: Terran However all 3 races take equally the same amount of difficulty to master(maybe because multitasking matters the most in the end).
I'm pretty low APM player(mostly Protoss) so I have a few builds I use that work even with lower APM.
PvT: Can be played on high level even with low APM. Just go for 1-2 gate goons into expansion. Build non stop goons until terran expands, then take 3rd. Tech arbiters. Golden rule is 3 gateways for each expansion. That means with 3 saturated bases it's 9 gateways to hold off terran timing push.
PvZ: Really, really difficult matchup. You should start practicing FE with various alternatives to see which suits you the best: - FE fast +1 weap, 2/3 gate zealot timing attack - FE corsair->dt - FE corsair->reaver - FE corsair->late +1 zealot/archon push Tip: storm/dt drops do wonder vs low level zerg players.
PvP: I don't play it much, but goon + shuttle+reaver into expansion or goon + shuttle+reaver push against expanding protoss is really common. Easy to win build: zealot rush into fast/proxy dark templars.
ZvP: Focus on 5 hatch vs expanding protoss into eigher mass hydra, mutas or lurkers. While lurkers are the safest they don't provide enough harassment options so protoss is usually free to take his 3rd. Also your overlords aren't safe enough.
ZvT: 2 base 3 hatch mutas. Now I find this build difficult do execute for low APM player. So instead I use 3 hatch lurkers with overlord drops(even before speed) and try to drop lurkers fast into his main. Repeat when he moves out or is low on defense. Meanwhile take more gas bases and tech hive for defilers. Works fine.
On June 30 2011 21:01 LastWish wrote: PvT: Can be played on high level even with low APM. Just go for 1-2 gate goons into expansion. Build non stop goons until terran expands, then take 3rd. Tech arbiters. Golden rule is 3 gateways for each expansion. That means with 3 saturated bases it's 9 gateways to hold off terran timing push.
Dude, what's the arbiter timing? I'm getting stomped in PvT. Doing 2 gates obs expand and get third base soon, but I'm having trouble fiding a good timing to get arbiter tech. W/O arbiters there is no way to win this mu.
On June 30 2011 21:01 LastWish wrote: PvT: Can be played on high level even with low APM. Just go for 1-2 gate goons into expansion. Build non stop goons until terran expands, then take 3rd. Tech arbiters. Golden rule is 3 gateways for each expansion. That means with 3 saturated bases it's 9 gateways to hold off terran timing push.
Dude, what's the arbiter timing? I'm getting stomped in PvT. Doing 2 gates obs expand and get third base soon, but I'm having trouble fiding a good timing to get arbiter tech. W/O arbiters there is no way to win this mu.
Well I suggest getting your arbs before your third base or you can go early third base and get more gateways then trans to arbiters
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Because it's a game I'm free to play as I wish, not controlled like SC2 and bnet. And it seems better thought-out than SC2.
With an SC2 expansion and some patches, we can expect a game as thought-out as BW. Grubby recently mentioned that he liked WC3 not so much without expansion but loved it with the expansion, so indirectly he said that he likes WC3 with expansion more than SC2 now.
With an expansion to be released within a year, I doubt that many players will get back to BW and rather chose to practice SC2 WOL as WOL skills should better transition to HOTS than BW skills to HOTS.
There is no reason not to show some BW to new SC2 players / viewers. But investing effort and time to help people get back?
Maybe some players will try out the original SC game with expansion, but "switch", as the topic suggests? I doubt it. While some maybe voice their intention to try out BW, they will probably don't like how you train goons from 8 gates and get back to SC2.
There will be even a second expansion for SC2. Even if Blizzard messes up HOTS, they still can fix it.
Between all the game wars and straight bitching and off-topic mess this topic has, it really reminds me of when someone mentioned how nice it would be if TL had a broodwar.temliquid.net or something to that effect.
Seriously, for every 10 SC2 articles, there's one BW one now. You have to wade through a sea of SC2 games to find any upcoming BW events or streams Now, even in the forum, every topic has at least 1/3 of it wasted by the same debate with the same people saying the same things.
Annnd...still going to (off topic) keep asking where the KT Violet ribbon went. Is he better now or did I miss something?
On topic? I think this is a marvelous idea. Best of luck to it and I have just one suggestion. (I'll try and think of more and be helpful by posting later if I do) I would like to see some videos where you either cast over or co-cast with new players. Like a radio show interview except with a player with both of you discussing the game. Similar to Battle.Net attack with the pros.
I can't seem to get back to where I was in Iccup and I've wanted to stream for sometime, so if you need an E/D- player for anything (lol) let me know. I'm there as soon as I can.
Or if you just want any help in general, actually, let me know. I'd love to help out getting BW more established...er...reestablished.
On topic? I think this is a marvelous idea. Best of luck to it and I have just one suggestion. (I'll try and think of more and be helpful by posting later if I do) I would like to see some videos where you either cast over or co-cast with new players. Like a radio show interview except with a player with both of you discussing the game. Similar to Battle.Net attack with the pros.
I can't seem to get back to where I was in Iccup and I've wanted to stream for sometime, so if you need an E/D- player for anything (lol) let me know. I'm there as soon as I can.
Or if you just want any help in general, actually, let me know. I'd love to help out getting BW more established...er...reestablished.
GL HF GG
Thanks for your offer! I'll bear you in mind if I need help. Right now, it's good if lower level players would give me questions, which I can then answer in my videos. I think a lot of people switching over will come into that bracket, and it's good to get as many useful pieces of info out there as possible.
On topic? I think this is a marvelous idea. Best of luck to it and I have just one suggestion. (I'll try and think of more and be helpful by posting later if I do) I would like to see some videos where you either cast over or co-cast with new players. Like a radio show interview except with a player with both of you discussing the game. Similar to Battle.Net attack with the pros.
I can't seem to get back to where I was in Iccup and I've wanted to stream for sometime, so if you need an E/D- player for anything (lol) let me know. I'm there as soon as I can.
Or if you just want any help in general, actually, let me know. I'd love to help out getting BW more established...er...reestablished.
GL HF GG
Thanks for your offer! I'll bear you in mind if I need help. Right now, it's good if lower level players would give me questions, which I can then answer in my videos. I think a lot of people switching over will come into that bracket, and it's good to get as many useful pieces of info out there as possible.
First things I'd love to see: 1 - Scouting information. Gas timings, what buildings to look for (like academy will most likely translate into bio terran) and how to read a zerg opening (number of hatches, gas timing: what will these translate into?);
2 - Timings in general (eg terran 5 fact push against toss).
I think the other parts of the gameplay will come with lots of practice and study of the liquipedia, but these are so hard to get coming from Sc2 that would be nice to have some pointers from a coach.
God, I damn myself for not playing SC:BW until SC2. This Game is so frustrating and pleasing at the same time, its amazing ^^
Ontopic: To be honest, I think all needed informations for newcomers are already provided. I got into SC:BW during SC2 Beta and devoured basicly everything SC:BW related in order to emulate it for SC2 (because there was not much Info about it out then). I went through - Vers Guide of Improving - Day[9] Dailies - Liquipedia (especially the Matchup Guides (PvT/PvZ) and Method Guides like Push Breaking or Zealot Bombing) - Recommended Threads List here on TL (especially crescendo's PvT Guide) - a lot of TLPD VOD's
So in order to provide a Guide for Newcomers, the best (at least from my perspective) would be something like a compendium about all these Information Sources instead of reinventing the wheel.
You know what would be cool... A guide detailing what to look for as each race on a map. For example, if I am protoss what am I looking for on Python? The wide open middle appeals to me and there is a relatively securable third but what builds would suit this map best? What builds are hindered by simply the terrain?
I think it is important for people coming to SC BW from either watching a lot of SC BW or having played SC2 that strategy is not what wins and loses you games on that level.
SC BW is like chess and SC2 is like poker where in SC2 you worry about what your opponent thinks and how he tries to trick you while in SC BW you worry about not dropping a piece.
In chess you don't worry about what lane to open if either you and your opponent may actually drop a whole piece in the next 10 moves. Opening the proper row may give you a 1/4th pawn advantage. Same is true in SC BW and this makes it different from SC2 where there's a safety net.
Trying to learn strategy at this point is counterproductive because trail and error will deceive you, You just can't decide what strategy is good and what is bad by looking at how the game unfolds.
I think a writeup proposed can't work. It is just too complex and too difficult to just write down. The main thing for SC2 players seems to think differently about the game than they did in SC2. It's all about macro, multitasking, tactics and execution. If execution is a bit off or your opponent doesn't play progamer like builds, all your strategy will be bad. It's like assuming your opponent can't be holding AA in poker because of how he played, but then he has AA anyway. You lose because he is bad and you misapply strategy.
You slowly have to build up this decision tree but first you have to lay the foundations. If you don't know how many dragoons or tanks your opponent has after 5 minutes. You have to develop a solid early game mechanically and tactically first, then get some game sense to actually interpret the game and then you can worry about and apply strategy.
Wow, I didn't realize how little sense my mechanics-only thing made until someone agreed with it, and now I'm all like "Woah".
On July 01 2011 12:04 Suisen wrote:SC BW is like chess and SC2 is like poker where in SC2 you worry about what your opponent thinks and how he tries to trick you while in SC BW you worry about not dropping a piece.
I feel like this is a little insulting to both games. Mindgames, proxies, hidden tech, etc is all a part of BW, and good scouting reveals a lot more in SC2 than you imply.
In chess you don't worry about what lane to open if either you and your opponent may actually drop a whole piece in the next 10 moves. Opening the proper row may give you a 1/4th pawn advantage. Same is true in SC BW and this makes it different from SC2 where there's a safety net.
Huh?
Trying to learn strategy at this point is counterproductive because trail and error will deceive you, You just can't decide what strategy is good and what is bad by looking at how the game unfolds.
I think a writeup proposed can't work. It is just too complex and too difficult to just write down. The main thing for SC2 players seems to think differently about the game than they did in SC2. It's all about macro, multitasking, tactics and execution.
Those do exist in SC2, you know. Yes yes, BW is more developed/polished/manly whatever, but it doesn't have a monopoly on these things.
If execution is a bit off or your opponent doesn't play progamer like builds, all your strategy will be bad. It's like assuming your opponent can't be holding AA in poker because of how he played, but then he has AA anyway. You lose because he is bad and you misapply strategy.
Yes, but this is far less applicable to BW than SC2. There's a few people on ICCUP going mass scout, yeah, but the fast majority are doing an attempt at "real" builds, even at the lowest level.
You slowly have to build up this decision tree but first you have to lay the foundations. If you don't know how many dragoons or tanks your opponent has after 5 minutes. You have to develop a solid early game mechanically and tactically first, then get some game sense to actually interpret the game and then you can worry about and apply strategy.
You're aware BW doesn't have an in-game clock, right? How do you develop game sense without going even a simple strategy? You have no benchmarks for timing.
I do maintain that mechanics > strategy, and that people overemphasize strategy because it's the "fun part", but to say strategy doesn't matter at all, in either game, even at low levels, is a little absurd.
On July 01 2011 07:50 Xanatoss wrote: God, I damn myself for not playing SC:BW until SC2. This Game is so frustrating and pleasing at the same time, its amazing ^^
I've never hated something as full time as I've hated BW.
Ontopic: To be honest, I think all needed informations for newcomers are already provided. I got into SC:BW during SC2 Beta and devoured basicly everything SC:BW related in order to emulate it for SC2 (because there was not much Info about it out then).
Enh. I don't think much from one game corresponds to the other. If you try and play BW on SC2 or SC2 on BW, it'll be all awkward and gross.
I went through - Vers Guide of Improving - Day[9] Dailies - Liquipedia (especially the Matchup Guides (PvT/PvZ) and Method Guides like Push Breaking or Zealot Bombing) - Recommended Threads List here on TL (especially crescendo's PvT Guide) - a lot of TLPD VOD's
I agree with this, though. Even though it's for SC2, Day[9]'s specials on improving your mechanics are the best resource on the topic I've ever seen, and I think even people who play BW exclusively should watch them.
On July 01 2011 12:50 Ribbon wrote: I feel like this is a little insulting to both games. Mindgames, proxies, hidden tech, etc is all a part of BW, and good scouting reveals a lot more in SC2 than you imply.
Maybe it's not an insult to either game and you are overreacting? Mind games definitely is not a part of D+ SC BW.
Huh?
If you don't play chess, you won't understand chess analogies. Sorry.
Applying progamer strategies to D games is also wrong. SK terran for example is going to be a bad strategy for D level terrans. They ought to go double fact. The game is filled with these kinds of things. People try to copy progamer builds but often don't understand them.
Yes, but this is far less applicable to BW than SC2. There's a few people on ICCUP going mass scout, yeah, but the fast majority are doing an attempt at "real" builds, even at the lowest level.
Of course you do a real build. But what does that have to do with strategy? Strategy is 5 fact timing pushes. Strategy is +1 speedlot rushing in TvZ. Strategy is when to switch to ultras. Strategy is when to use carriers and when to use arbiters. Strategy is doing a 2 fact into double armory late game because the map allows it in TvP. Strategy is doing fake medic marines vs zerg.
You're aware BW doesn't have an in-game clock, right? How do you develop game sense without going even a simple strategy? You have no benchmarks for timing.
So? You don't use minutes. You use what you have. Your build is 100% tight and this counts as time because the first tank coming out is the same every game unless something crazy happened. You don't actually know what time it is in actual minutes.
I do maintain that mechanics > strategy, and that people overemphasize strategy because it's the "fun part", but to say strategy doesn't matter at all, in either game, even at low levels, is a little absurd.
I don't know how you think not worrying about strategy means you have to play the game wrong. The point is that if people can beat you building mass scouts, you shouldn't be very worried about the exact moment you switch your tech or if you should do a timing push with or without weapons upgrade or about what is the proper late game for a certain map or learning a build order to the letter until you have 140 supply.
^^Yeah, although BW doesn't have in-game clock unless you are playing on Fish/Brainclan w/ wlauncher, you use relative timings, for example, if you are doing 9 min push and forgot scans, you can put down blind turrets at 75% Factory. You should probably make an episode on relative timings.
On July 01 2011 10:47 TheGlassface wrote: You know what would be cool... A guide detailing what to look for as each race on a map. For example, if I am protoss what am I looking for on Python? The wide open middle appeals to me and there is a relatively securable third but what builds would suit this map best? What builds are hindered by simply the terrain?
Yeah you should probably make a episode specific for each type of map (2p,3p,4p etc) or one that goes over all three or something.
Also more FPVODs would be nice.
Also, does anyone know if "tapping" applies to SCBW? I don't know if i should be spamming my rax every now and then to check marine completion rate.
On July 01 2011 17:28 Nazza wrote: ^^Yeah, although BW doesn't have in-game clock unless you are playing on Fish/Brainclan w/ wlauncher, you use relative timings, for example, if you are doing 9 min push and forgot scans, you can put down blind turrets at 75% Factory. You should probably make an episode on relative timings.
Relative timings come with playing a lot of games and sticking to a strategy so that you get a feel for "DTs about now". The SC2 clock makes it easier to get a head for timings, but it's not directly useful after the initial attack, because there are too many variables. There are timings that are useful, though, because they're malleable. In SC2, I make an overlord when my pool's at 500hp to have them finish at the same time, and that's true if I 14gas14pool, 14 hatch, get bunker rushed and have my opening fucked up, etc. Those are pretty nifty timings to memorize, but a lot of the more complex ones are kind of a star sense thing, I think.
I don't know how much timings can be "taught", since they're dependent on build and execution (40 food is a very different time for Flash than for a D-, for instance). I've heard day[9] say that BW pros use the mineral count in their mains as a makeshift clock, though.
On July 01 2011 10:47 TheGlassface wrote: You know what would be cool... A guide detailing what to look for as each race on a map. For example, if I am protoss what am I looking for on Python? The wide open middle appeals to me and there is a relatively securable third but what builds would suit this map best? What builds are hindered by simply the terrain?
Yeah you should probably make a episode specific for each type of map (2p,3p,4p etc) or one that goes over all three or something.
Also more FPVODs would be nice.
Python is practically the only map on ICCUP, so it's the best to talk about.
Also, does anyone know if "tapping" applies to SCBW? I don't know if i should be spamming my rax every now and then to check marine completion rate.
I do it (when I remember ;_;). I see no reason why you shouldn't. Obviously, you shouldn't hotkey all your rax because that's too many rax to hotkey, but you can tap one and F1 to your rax when it's free to macro out of all of them.
Actually, does anything in the Day[9] mechanicsdailies not apply to BW, actually? Does he not go in to anything we noobs should know about?
On July 01 2011 18:18 Ribbon wrote: Python is practically the only map on ICCUP, so it's the best to talk about.
Nononono, this is the worst thing you could ever say to a noob, and no python is not the only map on iccup, not even close, this is so wrong its hard to believe your not trolling right now. Ribbon, for the sake of all the sc2 noobs i think its time for you to stop posting in this thread.
On June 30 2011 21:01 LastWish wrote: PvT: Can be played on high level even with low APM. Just go for 1-2 gate goons into expansion. Build non stop goons until terran expands, then take 3rd. Tech arbiters. Golden rule is 3 gateways for each expansion. That means with 3 saturated bases it's 9 gateways to hold off terran timing push.
Dude, what's the arbiter timing? I'm getting stomped in PvT. Doing 2 gates obs expand and get third base soon, but I'm having trouble fiding a good timing to get arbiter tech. W/O arbiters there is no way to win this mu.
There are acually at least 2 common arbiter timings: 1. 2 base arbiter You need fast 2nd gas on expansion. Delayed 3rd expansion. This build was pretty common 1-2 years ago. 2. 3 base arbiter I prefer this option. You get 3rd base as soon as you see Terran expanding, use pylons(almost all pylons that are build after you expand) to block chokes/narrow paths. Robo before/after 3rd base - depends whether you can pull it off. Meanwhile build 100% goons(number of gateways are optional), I also get one shuttle + 4 lots. Add citadel, forge when you feel safe. After getting your 3rd build up-to 9 gateways total and start pumping goon/zeal. Meanwhile get your 2nd and 3rd gas(about the same time) and go stargate+archives(you should have citadel by this time with legs already) -> tribunal + second stargate. Research arbiter energy->statis. This was used before 2 base arbiters and seems to be getting popular over the last year once again.
If you are interested I have a nice replay where my noobiness beats a korean A- terran in a straight macro game. Even though I don't play BW that much anymore I still feel confidence in my PvT skill.
I will try to set as many things entirely straight as possible. I'm aiming to have an episode up by the end of the weekend. Trying to get some really good content in, without making each particularly long. Gotta keep them accessible.
On July 02 2011 01:39 J.Dong wrote: I heard that in SC2 there is much less of a defender's advantage than in BW. Is that true?
yes. BW's high ground mechanics are much more favorable towards the person on the high ground (makes stopping allins easier), also units are stupid in general which makes them move up ramps poorly. And there's no Warp Gates either! There's other reasons too.
Also...staying with my "we need a Brood War only version of Teamliquid" thing...
I think a project like this would be great but I think what would be *superb* is if we had more Brood War liquipedia updates. A quick look at the SC II version and then the Brood War version (moooooonths old front page, outdated builds, flat out incorrect information in some cases) shows that we could use things like a tournament portal...
which leads me to my next idea for your project. Maybe a series of VODs about tournament play. Etiquette, rules, etc. A lot of new players tend to not know these things. Seamless integration would help and maybe even allow for "newb" tournaments to be run.
I still want to say how much I love this idea. Anything we as a community can do to keep Brood War alive is A-OK by me.
Another idea would be to do a series on how to setup the various servers. FIsh, Iccup, Brain. Along with information on where to find textpacks(for reading the various languages), etiquette for those servers and so on. I know that was a huge help to my improvement when I started playing on Fish and Brain from time to time too.
On July 01 2011 20:52 pedrotrv wrote: @LastWish Thanks for tips. A replay would be really nice. I'll practice this today!
Ok, I didn't find the proper fast arbiter replay, however this replay shows well how to execute 3-base macro game. Arbiter + templar is even more effective than pure arbiters.
On July 02 2011 01:39 J.Dong wrote: I heard that in SC2 there is much less of a defender's advantage than in BW. Is that true?
yes. BW's high ground mechanics are much more favorable towards the person on the high ground (makes stopping allins easier), also units are stupid in general which makes them move up ramps poorly. And there's no Warp Gates either! There's other reasons too.
Aside the fact that unit AI in BW is really stupid and they will prolly get stuck in the ramp.
On July 01 2011 13:12 Suisen wrote: Applying progamer strategies to D games is also wrong. SK terran for example is going to be a bad strategy for D level terrans. They ought to go double fact. The game is filled with these kinds of things. People try to copy progamer builds but often don't understand them.
2fact for players who won't have the mechanics required to pull it off, as opposed to SK terran? Being a style of play as opposed to a set BO, lower level players trying out SK isn't as bad as them using an ee han attack....
On July 01 2011 13:12 Suisen wrote: Applying progamer strategies to D games is also wrong. SK terran for example is going to be a bad strategy for D level terrans. They ought to go double fact. The game is filled with these kinds of things. People try to copy progamer builds but often don't understand them.
2fact for players who won't have the mechanics required to pull it off, as opposed to SK terran? Being a style of play as opposed to a set BO, lower level players trying out SK isn't as bad as them using an ee han attack....
SK Terran isn't a set a build, but there are several set strategies that you can transition into SK Terran quite comfortably, such as A Yu Mi that leaves you with 4 Rax already made, 9 min push, which can do alot of damage with it's initial push and follow up with 2 ebays researching upgrades. I think 9 min push is still a pretty good option as it gives you some idea of when to get tech, and emphasizes upgrades which are quite important. Even though it is a timing push and you can screw up the timings, it is still quite possible to win off of a slightly off-timed push at lower levels.
No, you either go for tanks or you go double starport for science vessels. You can't make tanks and vessels off 2 fact and 2 port with just 2 gas.
It's a decision you make. Many people go 2 port. But considering many D players skip mutas anyway and their defilers are slow and not very dangerous, tanks is just better. Lurkers are just that strong on D level. A D terran isn't going to kill burrowed lurkers without tanks by first irradiating them and then attacking straight into them with proper marine micro.
Everything else you both talk about is besides the point. A 9 minute push has no bearing at all on going SK terran or tank heavy.
On July 02 2011 15:49 Giwoon wrote: i think the hardest thing ever from sc2 to scbw is stop doing 1a and do 1a2a3a
No Smatcast is pretty bad too. When a protoss suddenly stacks 8 storms in one place for a grand total for 3 hydra kills... Then you know what he's been playing.
Also wouldn't you at least use 1a2a in SCII for better army control? How do you form concaves?
On July 02 2011 18:16 Nazza wrote: SK Terran isn't a set a build
That's.... what I said.
EDIT: To prevent this from being a spam post, yes. 9-minute push in TvZ should be a staple. There's a thread with an exhaustive rundown on it somewhere in this forum, linked from a pinned topic I think.
I definitely am looking forward to this! Sorry your thread appears to have been hijacked repeatedly. This should make me less intimidated about the idea of jumping into the pool that is ICCup without knowing how to swim.
stylish's guide is still fairly viable for new players. it is also helpful for other race than terran as reading through his guides will help you understand the basic timing for pvt/zvt.
for tvz, 9 minute push is pretty good, though if you can, you're really better off doing 3 rax build to deny the zerg's third on maps like fighting spirit...or follow the trend and do the fast +1 upgrade 4/5 rax.
for tvp, preferably fast third to a slow push. stylish's 5 fact push is do-able, but i'm not sure how well it would work on fighting spirit.
I think Fighting Spirit > Python as the "average" map--so I'd recommend sc2 players to start off on this map.
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
Wrong.
StarCraft Brood War emphasizes skill on different aspects. I am amazed Blizzard hasn't updated StarCraft Brood War to fix obvious problems in the UI. Poor pathing (Dragoons hehehe), Control Group limits, worker rally point unable to target items, Zerg unable to have two rally points etc etc.
Imagine taking a test at school and having them take your erasers off your pencils. Well, you can still take the test, but now it's a little bit harder/more annoying for not really any reason at all.
Why should a game be harder because its user interface is harder to use, not because of the actual strategy components? It doesn't make sense. Imagine playing Starcraft without keybinds. Does that make the game harder/takes more skill to play? Of course, you can't press keys so things take longer, so only people with fast hands and good multi-tasking can play well. But that's just stupid; you ruin the concept of strategy games with that mindset.
TLDR: not trolling at all, just doing a 'truth rage' that SC BW should of had components implemented in Starcraft 2. And that Strategy doesn't equal making things harder to perform mechanically.
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
Wrong.
StarCraft Brood War emphasizes skill on different aspects. I am amazed Blizzard hasn't updated StarCraft Brood War to fix obvious problems in the UI. Poor pathing (Dragoons hehehe), Control Group limits, worker rally point unable to target items, Zerg unable to have two rally points etc etc.
Imagine taking a test at school and having them take your erasers off your pencils. Well, you can still take the test, but now it's a little bit harder/more annoying for not really any reason at all.
Why should a game be harder because its user interface is harder to use, not because of the actual strategy components? It doesn't make sense. Imagine playing Starcraft without keybinds. Does that make the game harder/takes more skill to play? Of course, you can't press keys so things take longer, so only people with fast hands and good multi-tasking can play well. But that's just stupid; you ruin the concept of strategy games with that mindset.
TLDR: not trolling at all, just doing a 'truth rage' that SC BW should of had components implemented in Starcraft 2. And that Strategy doesn't equal making things harder to perform mechanically.
Even so Broodwar was a lot more challenging than Starcraft II in forms of strategy, multitasking etc. Broodwar being harder mechanically is also a good thing. What if everyone could run 10m/s while playing soccer?
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
Wrong.
StarCraft Brood War emphasizes skill on different aspects. I am amazed Blizzard hasn't updated StarCraft Brood War to fix obvious problems in the UI. Poor pathing (Dragoons hehehe), Control Group limits, worker rally point unable to target items, Zerg unable to have two rally points etc etc.
Imagine taking a test at school and having them take your erasers off your pencils. Well, you can still take the test, but now it's a little bit harder/more annoying for not really any reason at all.
Why should a game be harder because its user interface is harder to use, not because of the actual strategy components? It doesn't make sense. Imagine playing Starcraft without keybinds. Does that make the game harder/takes more skill to play? Of course, you can't press keys so things take longer, so only people with fast hands and good multi-tasking can play well. But that's just stupid; you ruin the concept of strategy games with that mindset.
TLDR: not trolling at all, just doing a 'truth rage' that SC BW should of had components implemented in Starcraft 2. And that Strategy doesn't equal making things harder to perform mechanically.
"From now on, anyone using the "Dune argument" will be temp banned. No warnings, just banned.
For those of you unaware of what it is, here's an explanation: The "Dune argument" is that if we are so worried about skill, and think MBS is so detrimental to this, why don't we revert back to the Dune UI, where you could only select one unit at a time.
The counter-argument to this is obvious: If you want everything to be so easy, why don't we turn the game into an interactive movie? Why don't we just have the computer macro for you, and you can control the units!
See how silly both of these arguments are? This type of argumentation leads nowhere, as what's important is finding a balance, not going to various extremes to make silly points.
Hmmm, this first video may have to be 2 videos. Oh wellz coming up later today. I'll put up a seperate video for dealing with some of the stuff which has cropped up in this thread (though the third from last comment may need my attention ASAP)
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
Wrong.
StarCraft Brood War emphasizes skill on different aspects. I am amazed Blizzard hasn't updated StarCraft Brood War to fix obvious problems in the UI. Poor pathing (Dragoons hehehe), Control Group limits, worker rally point unable to target items, Zerg unable to have two rally points etc etc.
Imagine taking a test at school and having them take your erasers off your pencils. Well, you can still take the test, but now it's a little bit harder/more annoying for not really any reason at all.
Why should a game be harder because its user interface is harder to use, not because of the actual strategy components? It doesn't make sense. Imagine playing Starcraft without keybinds. Does that make the game harder/takes more skill to play? Of course, you can't press keys so things take longer, so only people with fast hands and good multi-tasking can play well. But that's just stupid; you ruin the concept of strategy games with that mindset.
TLDR: not trolling at all, just doing a 'truth rage' that SC BW should of had components implemented in Starcraft 2. And that Strategy doesn't equal making things harder to perform mechanically.
"From now on, anyone using the "Dune argument" will be temp banned. No warnings, just banned.
For those of you unaware of what it is, here's an explanation: The "Dune argument" is that if we are so worried about skill, and think MBS is so detrimental to this, why don't we revert back to the Dune UI, where you could only select one unit at a time.
The counter-argument to this is obvious: If you want everything to be so easy, why don't we turn the game into an interactive movie? Why don't we just have the computer macro for you, and you can control the units!
See how silly both of these arguments are? This type of argumentation leads nowhere, as what's important is finding a balance, not going to various extremes to make silly points.
Thank you for your co-operation, - FrozenArbiter"
So, should I point out 1) Off topic, starting to make this thread more and more into the usual BW VS SC2 jank and you didn't even bother to type anything, just copy and pasted (adding to more of the problem) 2) The quote you just *had* to use is from the SC 2 forum guidelines. This is the BW forum.
On topic : I was thinking, what might be very helpful/interesting/just plain fun is to get that old video of Boxer V Hiya that has subtitles up. I learned so much form that VOD
Also, when do you think we can get a preview of your first one? I'm very excited to see where this goes.
Is there a new player channel? Should we work to put something together like that? Maybe even something like a newb tourney?
On July 04 2011 21:53 maybenexttime wrote: Why don't we just have the computer macro for you, and you can control the units!
The saddest part of that, is I saw a "review" for SC2 on a website that basically said it was bad because you had to manually make units and everyone would rush you and only make one type of unit.
So apparently some people don't think that argument is silly.
OT: Looking forward to seeing how this guide shapes up. I'm excited!
day[9] is actually doing a daily on Brood War (or, "SC2: BW, which is BW with SC2 graphics and no MBS or Unlimited Unit Selection).
I'm watching it live now, and it might be a really good overview for people who know nothing about BW, and then into more detailed stuff. It's aimed at the super-noobs who've never heard of BW.
Will it be up on this site or on like a justin.tv site? I am a unique case. My new school computer cannot handle sc2. But I wanted to keep my mechanics up and hopefully improve so I decided to learn brood war. Since I do not know much about it, thank you for making a guide!
I dunno man. I had the same kind of mouth-gaping-open vibe when i watched some of the sc2bw games as regular bw, it seems to be quite relevant to switching from sc2 to bw. and yes, definitely "infest" the school computers with bw. its a wonderful thing, a 100 mb gift in computer, ridiculous :p
The only ONLY advice I can give for SC2 going to SCBW is to always send your worker to the mineral patch!
Oh god... the amount of times I see 5 probes just sitting infront of my mineral patch doing nothing.... then I say to myself.. "hey... my 12 nex is a little bit late isnt it?!"
I actually think Ribbon has made some good points now, at least he is contributing to the thread rather than just whining. As long as he doesn't talk about the process of learning BW and just talks about things from a noob perspective, hes really one of the only ones contributing right now.
Everyone please stop whining about SC2 and BW and make this thread useful again.
I can't really say much about the first part of the episode, partly because I'm a bw player (I can't judge your accuracy with comparison of units/if you left units out/etc) and partly because I can't judge the pacing/quality of the episode until I've seen all of the parts.
I'll offer some basic feedback, but I'm not sure how much of it is going to be included in the following parts... but yeah: - Try not to look off-screen at your notes too much! You want to engage the audience with as much 'fluidity' (for lack of a better word >.>) as possible. - Try and use vods/replays to explain examples rather than static pictures; it puts ideas into context as well as making the show more engaging (i.e. showing a shuttle in action (with a reaver harass for two birds with one stone!), showing how gateways produce units, etc.). Again not sure how relevant this will be as you might do this in later episodes! - You forgot to mention 'high ground advantage', which will make a /huge/ difference to sc2 players
Looking promising; I'm sure this will be helpful for introducing sc2 players to bw!
Yeah I'll be doing exactly the kind of thing with VODs etc for the next section, as I go into more depth on specific units.
Fluidity will definitely be something I can work on, and which will come with more practice.
High ground advantage and other such details will be covered in the basic mechanics differences rundown, which may need a seperate video as part 3, or may fit into part 2.
Well, usually I am not the the kind of person who shreds contributions but as an recent newcomer in SC:BW I feel really affected by this topic so I will try to be as constructive as possible.
Even at such an basic topic as comparing both games units' there are already points where I as watcher would disagree. For example the Phoenix is much better compareable to Corsairs (fast, good vs light, equal costs) than scouts, which are again more compareable to Voidrays (slow, shoots ground and air, expensive). Furthermore Mothership vs Arbiter: Both are flying T3 Spellcasters with weak offensive, both cloak friendly Units beneath, both have recall, both have a spell that manipulates clumps of units (friend or foe). I can hardly think of any Unit more similar to each other. Nevertheless I think this discussion is a matter of taste and the concerning theme of arguable statements might vanish as soon as you potentially stop comparing both games at later episodes.
All that beside I wonder why you actually chose this topic as your first one. Sure its flashy with all the pictures and stuff but it appears very very trivial to me. I would have liked much more of a introduction of the overarching concepts of SC:BW, like revolving heavily around - mechanics - very acurate formulated gameplans (due to the game being played for so long) - controling space (and the resulting timing windows through that) due to highground advantage and powerful units like reavers, lurkers and siege tanks
because these are the main reasons (at least for me) why I am interested in SC:BW and imho other people might be aswell, instead of a medic and a dropship are two sepperate Units in this game (exaggerated spoken).
Hope that was not too harsh, apology in advance if so.
I wanted to make sure that people knew the absolute basics before I got into the more advanced stuff. I want to be able to cater for people all the way from "I wonder what BW is like". It's going to go into plenty more depth, I tried to make that clear. I realise that many people don't need this first video, but I'm sure that some will. Many won't need the next, talking about key units in more depth (with VODs), and outlining some key mechanics differences, eg. high ground advantage, no chrono boost, no MBS etc.
I will be doing regular replay studies after the original guides, but they aren't going to be about teaching specific build orders etc. There's no need for that, we have all the builds we could ever want already written down, in great detail. They will be studying the way each game is being played.
Question: how do you use your control groups? 5-0 being gateways and/or robo/stargates? And 1-4 are units? 6 doesn't seem like enough. And what about my nexi? I have to say I enjoy sc2s multiple building selection. I heard a bit that the F2-F5 keys are used for camera... Do you use 5 and 6 for nexi until midgame then switch them to gates and make your camera groups the bases and click to make probes?
On July 06 2011 08:56 Mr. Enchilada wrote: Question: how do you use your control groups? 5-0 being gateways and/or robo/stargates? And 1-4 are units? 6 doesn't seem like enough. And what about my nexi? I have to say I enjoy sc2s multiple building selection. I heard a bit that the F2-F5 keys are used for camera... Do you use 5 and 6 for nexi until midgame then switch them to gates and make your camera groups the bases and click to make probes?
Most people use Fkeys(F2 F3 F4) to get into those gateways though in my case I use 6 for gateways tapping six twice will put your camera on that gateway and just click each gateway. People use 1-5 for units some use 456 for nexus and some use 09 and the fkeys.
I keep my nexus under 09 since vulture raids comes and I have to replenish my probe count. Anyway just hotkey 1 gateway and just click on them one by one and press the hotkey for producing that unit since you'll usually have more than 6+ gateways and you really just can't hotkey them all
Yeah that makes sense. Any tips for army? In campaign I know units get all fucked up going up cliffs. And dragoons are the dumbest AI ever implemented into a game.
On July 06 2011 08:56 Mr. Enchilada wrote: Question: how do you use your control groups? 5-0 being gateways and/or robo/stargates? And 1-4 are units? 6 doesn't seem like enough. And what about my nexi? I have to say I enjoy sc2s multiple building selection. I heard a bit that the F2-F5 keys are used for camera... Do you use 5 and 6 for nexi until midgame then switch them to gates and make your camera groups the bases and click to make probes?
Depends on race but as a protoss the nexuses(nexii?) are best on 0-9-8.. because "p" key is near those numbers. As a terran and zerg it may be the other way round. As a protoss, early games I use 0-nexus, 9-8..-gateways. This way you can properly macro or execute timing attacks, rushes on 1 base. After I get 2+ bases with over 4 gateways,I rehotkey(0-9.. for nexus) and use max one hotkey for gateways - double tap and click each individually. 1..5 = units. F-keys are nice but I have really never got used to them.
Also your building placement architecture is important(at least for toss and terran, since zerg has a lot of his hatcheries on hotkeys). I try to use this whenever possible: G G G G G G G PP G G - or - G G PP G G G G G G G
Gateway is twice the width of a pylon, so this forms a nice shape. This way all your units can get out of gateways and you can effectively macro from your gateways.
On July 06 2011 10:51 Mr. Enchilada wrote: Yeah that makes sense. Any tips for army? In campaign I know units get all fucked up going up cliffs. And dragoons are the dumbest AI ever implemented into a game.
You just have to click repeatedly when moving through narrow passages. Sometimes your dragoons get stuck - it looks like they have they cannon orifices opened ready to fire but they don't shoot and don't react to move command either. This is super annoying and you have to click 's' for stop in order to make this go away.
Ok, I've seen that people want more detail, faster. So in the next part with focus on individual crucial units, I'll get plenty of detail in on how to micro these units, and what situations to use them in.
I'm sorry if this is slightly off topic but I felt that making a whole new thread for this would be overkill: As a new Sc2 player who never played sc or bw, what would make someone play sc instead of sc2? I could understand players who have been playing SC for years to want to stick with it but what argument could be used to get someone with no previous SC experience to choose it over SC2?
On July 07 2011 01:36 Steeveholt wrote: I'm sorry if this is slightly off topic but I felt that making a whole new thread for this would be overkill: As a new Sc2 player who never played sc or bw, what would make someone play sc instead of sc2? I could understand players who have been playing SC for years to want to stick with it but what argument could be used to get someone with no previous SC experience to choose it over SC2?
Just wondering!
Well the most important is that BW is a complete game that has been tested through time. SC2 on the other hand is far from a complete game, may be one day after a datadisk or two, but not right now. The only thing that makes SC2 better is that it has larger comunity worldwide. Though part of the community are just common people that like to hang out with others and as the time goes by they will move to something else.. eventually. BW players + community are forged from passion for the game.
On July 07 2011 01:36 Steeveholt wrote: I'm sorry if this is slightly off topic but I felt that making a whole new thread for this would be overkill: As a new Sc2 player who never played sc or bw, what would make someone play sc instead of sc2? I could understand players who have been playing SC for years to want to stick with it but what argument could be used to get someone with no previous SC experience to choose it over SC2?
Just wondering!
If you were to believe the idea that the games are "radically different?" That'd be like asking should one play soccer or basketball, you'd need to sample them both and find which one suits you. If you were to think they're very similar but with one being more refined and the other coming into it's own? Same deal, honestly.
The main difference is, Brood War is very reined at this point and comes with years of history and build orders and things you can look up. SC 2 still has 2 expansions to go and lord knows what the game will look like by then.
If you're a graphics-phile, you'd want Sc 2. No one can deny the game looks beautiful even if they (I) do still love the old school graphics in BW
The control scheme I find is something that takes getting used to if you've been accustomed to newer RTS series. If you're coming fresh into the RTS world, I don't think it matters as they both take time to learn how to operate.
The galaxy editor, if you're into modding, is astounding...even if the way they chose to implement the releasing of custom maps was re-taaaarrrrrded.
That's what I can think of for now, will edit if I think of more.
On June 25 2011 07:06 HornyHerring wrote: THIS IS NO WAY A TROLLING OR HATING POST!
Just wondering - pure curiousity, why do/would people switch from SC2 to BW?
Control group limit = more skill necessary to play the game. Also, SCBW isn't a game that breaks every game down into build order autowins and autolosses. I used to watch a lot of pro SC2, and that's all it was. Whoever did the build that was the counter, that guy always won.
Wrong.
StarCraft Brood War emphasizes skill on different aspects. I am amazed Blizzard hasn't updated StarCraft Brood War to fix obvious problems in the UI. Poor pathing (Dragoons hehehe), Control Group limits, worker rally point unable to target items, Zerg unable to have two rally points etc etc.
Imagine taking a test at school and having them take your erasers off your pencils. Well, you can still take the test, but now it's a little bit harder/more annoying for not really any reason at all.
Why should a game be harder because its user interface is harder to use, not because of the actual strategy components? It doesn't make sense. Imagine playing Starcraft without keybinds. Does that make the game harder/takes more skill to play? Of course, you can't press keys so things take longer, so only people with fast hands and good multi-tasking can play well. But that's just stupid; you ruin the concept of strategy games with that mindset.
TLDR: not trolling at all, just doing a 'truth rage' that SC BW should of had components implemented in Starcraft 2. And that Strategy doesn't equal making things harder to perform mechanically.
"From now on, anyone using the "Dune argument" will be temp banned. No warnings, just banned.
For those of you unaware of what it is, here's an explanation: The "Dune argument" is that if we are so worried about skill, and think MBS is so detrimental to this, why don't we revert back to the Dune UI, where you could only select one unit at a time.
The counter-argument to this is obvious: If you want everything to be so easy, why don't we turn the game into an interactive movie? Why don't we just have the computer macro for you, and you can control the units!
See how silly both of these arguments are? This type of argumentation leads nowhere, as what's important is finding a balance, not going to various extremes to make silly points.
Thank you for your co-operation, - FrozenArbiter"
In no way shape or form was my nested quote a "Dune" argument.
On July 06 2011 02:19 ImbaTosS wrote: Yeah I'll be doing exactly the kind of thing with VODs etc for the next section, as I go into more depth on specific units.
My thoughts on the VOD, as an SC2 player with a very out-of-date and generally lower knowledge of BW.
I think my big issue is that it doesn't make BW sound fun. I guess, yeah, the intention is for people already interested in BW, but it feels weird for the introduction to not start with "you should play BW because X". That's one of the reasons I brought up this, which contains very little useful knowledge, but makes BW (or SC2:BW, close enough for union work) look fun as hell. Something like that works better as a first video, I think. And, obviously, a video like this with the real BW instead of SC2 modded to be BW is better, but I think the daily is so good at making BW look really fun that it's worth being an intro anyway.
Unless someone wants to do it with BW, of course.
Anyway, on to the video proper. I like it. Any complaints I have are mostly nitpicky.
1. VR -> Scout (kinda), Phoenix -> Corsair. Yes, Phoenices can kinda sorta fight ground units, but Phoenix and 'Sairs have a much more similar role than Phoenix/Scout 2. Mothership is totally -> Arbiter. They both have recall, and Vortex is generally used as a stasis (or for Storm Toilets) 3. Every SC1 Terran unit except the Valk is in a campaign more or less unchanged (except the science vessel, which has different, which might be worth prefacing with. 4. I would just say the reaper's gone entirely. Nothing in BW is really used the same way (for Terran). 5. Are medics actually the same speed as unstimmed marines? I remember them always running ahead of the army, but I haven't played Terran in a while. 6. Overlords can detect in BW, which is worth a mention 7. Guardians are way, way, WAY worse than Brood Lords, which I feel is important enough to mention as well, though I suppose if you're going to go in depth later, it makes sense to mention ir that.
On July 07 2011 01:36 Steeveholt wrote: I'm sorry if this is slightly off topic but I felt that making a whole new thread for this would be overkill: As a new Sc2 player who never played sc or bw, what would make someone play sc instead of sc2? I could understand players who have been playing SC for years to want to stick with it but what argument could be used to get someone with no previous SC experience to choose it over SC2?
Just wondering!
Until someone makes a good one with the "real" BW, I'll point to the day9 daily I linked above as a good reason why it's kind of fun. The "challenge" was that only people who never played BW submitted replays.
On July 07 2011 05:35 LastWish wrote: The only thing that makes SC2 better is that it has larger comunity worldwide. Though part of the community are just common people that like to hang out with others and as the time goes by they will move to something else.. eventually. BW players + community are forged from passion for the game.
I feel that this is kind of insulting to SC2 fans who are putting in a lot of effort to try to push SC2 as the Big E-Sport, and who buy tickets for GSLs and MLGs instead of pirating everything, tune in to one of the various talk shows about SC2, watch the After Hours Gaming League which is designed to spread e-sports to people not normally inclined, etc. etc. etc. SC2 fans can actually get nearly evangelical about it. Having that blown off by BW fans actually makes SC2 fans disinclined to try BW.
I think, if you want to convert, "SC2 is really good but BW is even better" is a better message than "SC2 is terrible, and everyone who likes SC2 is terrible", which can come out of the BW fanbase sometimes. I mean, granted, there's always that one SC2 fan in every goddamn thread going "LOL BW has old graphic = it sucks" and making me ashamed to be associated with him, but postive messages are more easily accepted.
I am wanting to learn to improve in sc2 actually. The macro in BW seems sooo much harder, for example making every fucking worker not sit there like an idiot on break is a challenge right now lol. But The idea of 12 unit strike forces intrigues me so much more. So while I am playing I don't care about strategy as I am not doing iccup or anything, I am just practicing making things, while moving units around the map and keeping money low. I am a high diamond zerg, but since the queen-larvae mechanic isn't in there I am having fun with Toss actually (stupid dragoons...). So to answer the "WHY BW? DERP" posts, I honestly feel if you didn't play it, going back will really elevate your sc2.
Thanks for the answers guys, sorry if the question caused a bit of noise in the thread! I actually went out and bought the game today (figured I could afford the 15$ to give it a shot!)
For sure dude. But I have a question, I am using this for sc2 practice. Is there ANY mod out there that added (i think its called this MBS? Manually telling each work to mine is bothering me so much! I recognize that when transferring back that mental space could be use maybe to check chtono or something, but for now I would really rather do without.
On July 07 2011 17:23 Mr. Enchilada wrote: For sure dude. But I have a question, I am using this for sc2 practice. Is there ANY mod out there that added (i think its called this MBS? Manually telling each work to mine is bothering me so much! I recognize that when transferring back that mental space could be use maybe to check chtono or something, but for now I would really rather do without.
SC2:BW has an "Easy Mode" that has MBS and Unlimited Unit Selection, but it's not really the same.
On July 07 2011 05:35 LastWish wrote: The only thing that makes SC2 better is that it has larger comunity worldwide. Though part of the community are just common people that like to hang out with others and as the time goes by they will move to something else.. eventually. BW players + community are forged from passion for the game.
I feel that this is kind of insulting to SC2 fans who are putting in a lot of effort to try to push SC2 as the Big E-Sport, and who buy tickets for GSLs and MLGs instead of pirating everything, tune in to one of the various talk shows about SC2, watch the After Hours Gaming League which is designed to spread e-sports to people not normally inclined, etc. etc. etc. SC2 fans can actually get nearly evangelical about it. Having that blown off by BW fans actually makes SC2 fans disinclined to try BW.
I think, if you want to convert, "SC2 is really good but BW is even better" is a better message than "SC2 is terrible, and everyone who likes SC2 is terrible", which can come out of the BW fanbase sometimes. I mean, granted, there's always that one SC2 fan in every goddamn thread going "LOL BW has old graphic = it sucks" and making me ashamed to be associated with him, but postive messages are more easily accepted.
I'm not trying to convert anyone.. And don't get me wrong I don't hate SC2, even I started to play it because I have friends who do play it and I wanted to have something to talk/play with them. However I didn't like all the marketing, artificial hype, where SC2 was pushed out the blue to the pro-play right after the release(or even in the beta stage). This unnatural force makes me feel little respect for the game and the people behind the marketing campaign. I love how BW developed naturally to the position it's in.
Man i played bw last night for the first time in like 8 months. Holy crap! Its magical. I actually had better army control since i only had 12 units in a control group. I was taking thirds on fighting spirit and sandwiching tank pushes from three sides like the good old days. It was really fun. I would have lost horribly if i wasn't playing my friend who hadn't played in a similar amount of time. I took my mouse hand off the mouse to 4d5d6d7d8d ;p Playing bw is so good for starcraft 2 players and humans everywhere.
On July 07 2011 05:35 LastWish wrote: The only thing that makes SC2 better is that it has larger comunity worldwide. Though part of the community are just common people that like to hang out with others and as the time goes by they will move to something else.. eventually. BW players + community are forged from passion for the game.
I feel that this is kind of insulting to SC2 fans who are putting in a lot of effort to try to push SC2 as the Big E-Sport, and who buy tickets for GSLs and MLGs instead of pirating everything, tune in to one of the various talk shows about SC2, watch the After Hours Gaming League which is designed to spread e-sports to people not normally inclined, etc. etc. etc. SC2 fans can actually get nearly evangelical about it. Having that blown off by BW fans actually makes SC2 fans disinclined to try BW.
I think, if you want to convert, "SC2 is really good but BW is even better" is a better message than "SC2 is terrible, and everyone who likes SC2 is terrible", which can come out of the BW fanbase sometimes. I mean, granted, there's always that one SC2 fan in every goddamn thread going "LOL BW has old graphic = it sucks" and making me ashamed to be associated with him, but postive messages are more easily accepted.
I'm not trying to convert anyone.. And don't get me wrong I don't hate SC2, even I started to play it because I have friends who do play it and I wanted to have something to talk/play with them. However I didn't like all the marketing, artificial hype, where SC2 was pushed out the blue to the pro-play right after the release(or even in the beta stage). This unnatural force makes me feel little respect for the game and the people behind the marketing campaign. I love how BW developed naturally to the position it's in.
KeSPA was founded in 2000.
And anyway, Blizz hasn't actually pushed SC2 as an e-sport that much (something SC2 fans are unhappy with them for). The official ladder has bad-for-tourney-play maps (I mean, look at this. Imagine BW on these maps!), and pretty much all they do is put ads for major SC2 tournaments on the official SC2 web site. Both games became big (or as big as they are) because of the dedication of the fans and more than a little prodding from large interests (KeSPA, OnGameNet, Tooniverse way back when, GOM, MLG, Anibox now).
Anyway, bringing this back to topic, a friendly open demeanor is more convincing than an elitist hipster one, which I see a lot, sadly
On July 07 2011 17:23 Mr. Enchilada wrote: For sure dude. But I have a question, I am using this for sc2 practice. Is there ANY mod out there that added (i think its called this MBS? Manually telling each work to mine is bothering me so much! I recognize that when transferring back that mental space could be use maybe to check chtono or something, but for now I would really rather do without.
SC2:BW has an "Easy Mode" that has MBS and Unlimited Unit Selection, but it's not really the same.
Lol I know. But I think you missed my other posts in this thread. I can't run sc2 on the computer I will now be using for a while. So I am playing brood war just to keep my sc2 skills up. But the mining thing makes it a little hard to trick myself into "practicing" sc2 things as it is quite different. If I could run SC2: BW I would just play sc2! I want a mod with MBS! lol
On July 07 2011 17:23 Mr. Enchilada wrote: For sure dude. But I have a question, I am using this for sc2 practice. Is there ANY mod out there that added (i think its called this MBS? Manually telling each work to mine is bothering me so much! I recognize that when transferring back that mental space could be use maybe to check chtono or something, but for now I would really rather do without.
SC2:BW has an "Easy Mode" that has MBS and Unlimited Unit Selection, but it's not really the same.
Lol I know. But I think you missed my other posts in this thread. I can't run sc2 on the computer I will now be using for a while. So I am playing brood war just to keep my sc2 skills up. But the mining thing makes it a little hard to trick myself into "practicing" sc2 things as it is quite different. If I could run SC2: BW I would just play sc2! I want a mod with MBS! lol
Ah.
Then no.
BW fans don't really like MBS, so there's no demand. Even if such a mod did exist, you wouldn't be able to play with anyone, because no one cares about it.
Playing BW to learn SC2 in any meaningful way (except - maybe - good tank positioning in TvT where both players go mech) is as silly as the reverse, though. That's why most of the BW B-teamers who switched to SC2 fell off the face of the earth after a while. Unless you're below platinum, in which case playing without MBS is actually ideal, because if you're below platinum you need to train your mechanics/apm.
If you want to play BW, play BW. If you want to play SC2, use SC2. If you want BW with MBS, SC2BW Easymode. Those are your options. (SC2BW Hard Mode is for people like me who can't open ports on their routers ;_;)
If you can't play SC2 and want to do something to help you with it, there are like 50 really good streams at all times.
MBS exists in Broodwar, but it's a hack and no one will play you.
If you find it hard to keep coming back to your base to put workers on minerals just think of it as practicing your multitask. Try and make sure you visit your base even during battles if you aren't going to die from positioning wrong.
On July 06 2011 08:56 Mr. Enchilada wrote: Question: how do you use your control groups? 5-0 being gateways and/or robo/stargates? And 1-4 are units? 6 doesn't seem like enough. And what about my nexi? I have to say I enjoy sc2s multiple building selection. I heard a bit that the F2-F5 keys are used for camera... Do you use 5 and 6 for nexi until midgame then switch them to gates and make your camera groups the bases and click to make probes?
90 For nexuses (P is too far for fkeys)
8 for stargate / scouting probe
7 for robo / first zealot
45678 early gateways
123456 units, need everything grouped for flanking tanks and taking down undefended bases quickly.
fkeys for gateways/bases.
If you are playing Terran i find it more efficient to use fkeys for command centers and send scv -> make scv. You will have more hotkeys for production buildings then.
Guys you don't understand, I CANNOT USE SC2 on my current computer anymore. I want to play broodwar to keep mechanics up until I can fix the issue. But I just wanna play vs the AI to work on sc2 builds actually. Please show me this MBS hack! I don't want to play people, I just wanna keep my mechanics up
If it's mechanics you want to practice, play BW without any bullshit.
If it's "too hard", fucking deal with it. Consider it a multi-tasking trainer, if you must. If you can't even build units in BW, how do you expect to get out of Silver in SC2?
On July 07 2011 17:23 Mr. Enchilada wrote: For sure dude. But I have a question, I am using this for sc2 practice. Is there ANY mod out there that added (i think its called this MBS? Manually telling each work to mine is bothering me so much! I recognize that when transferring back that mental space could be use maybe to check chtono or something, but for now I would really rather do without.
SC2:BW has an "Easy Mode" that has MBS and Unlimited Unit Selection, but it's not really the same.
Lol I know. But I think you missed my other posts in this thread. I can't run sc2 on the computer I will now be using for a while. So I am playing brood war just to keep my sc2 skills up. But the mining thing makes it a little hard to trick myself into "practicing" sc2 things as it is quite different. If I could run SC2: BW I would just play sc2! I want a mod with MBS! lol
If you BW and you manually rally workers you won't play SC2 and start manually telling workers to mine. Trust me, dude. It's not something you have to worry about lol.
If you learn how to use a single hotkey eg. 6 for a barracks in the center of other barracks, and then spam M to make rines from all of them, it's the same basic skill that requires you to have good timing to keep up with your macro. It's not like once you get into SC2 you'll start using SBS for everything.
I mean all you are doing is basically practicing moving the mouse, spending your money, and having good macro timings anyways. Those basic skills will transfer. Why are you worried?
Uh, you can't actually play SC2 builds in BW though, except maybe forge fe.
Seems like this guy is worrying about nothing. Also, I recommend a seperate thread for that. Call it "how do I hack MBS into BroodWar?" I give it... half an hour from opening to being closed.
But seriously, just playing BW just to try and keep SC2 skills up might feel a bit thankless and difficult. It's not really something you can just dip into so much. SC2 builds won't work in BW.
On July 09 2011 11:24 Ribbon wrote: If it's mechanics you want to practice, play BW without any bullshit.
If it's "too hard", fucking deal with it. Consider it a multi-tasking trainer, if you must. If you can't even build units in BW, how do you expect to get out of Silver in SC2?
Exactly, trying to play BW with MBS just destroys any chance you have of improving, in both games.
There is another video going to be put up tomorrow. Been really busy these last few days, but I'm really committed to this project, and making it a success.
Does anybody know what BW's lowest graphics settings are? My laptop has a hard time running BW (I have 512 mb RAM) and I can't play the game for more then 30 minutes. So far I've disabled unit icons and I usually put latency to high or highest while on iccup. I also use CCleaner to take out everything I don't need (Internet Cache, Recycle Bin, etc).
On July 12 2011 08:45 NationInArms wrote: Does anybody know what BW's lowest graphics settings are? My laptop has a hard time running BW (I have 512 mb RAM) and I can't play the game for more then 30 minutes. So far I've disabled unit icons and I usually put latency to high or highest while on iccup. I also use CCleaner to take out everything I don't need (Internet Cache, Recycle Bin, etc).
Hard time like what? Lagging? In singleplayer or only in multiplayer?
Also how old is your computer? This game is from 1998 it should work.
There are no graphics settings on this game- that's how old it is. Unit icons is.. pretty much it lol. You might do well to see what people have to say in tech support forum, though I depending on how old your laptop is, it may be wearing out.
On July 12 2011 08:45 NationInArms wrote: Does anybody know what BW's lowest graphics settings are? My laptop has a hard time running BW (I have 512 mb RAM) and I can't play the game for more then 30 minutes. So far I've disabled unit icons and I usually put latency to high or highest while on iccup. I also use CCleaner to take out everything I don't need (Internet Cache, Recycle Bin, etc).
If you get a black or blue screen after playing for 30 minutes, it could mean your graphics card is overheating, maybe because the fan broke or something. That happened to my desktop.
In singleplayer and multiplayer it lags after 30 minutes. The laptop is from 2003 maybe? It just slows down and lags, no black/blue screen. It's been reset to factory settings twice because it was passed down in the family. Oh well, I'll try to disable everything running in the background. Thanks.
Problem solved, I had to enable CPU throttling. Thanks for everything.
I think there is a lot of potential for playing standard PvZ/TvZ on iccup that will help TvZ in SC2.
1st obvious reason is BW forces you to get better multitask much faster than SC2. I went from BW to SC2, but I've seen high level players who have played SC2 for ages and still only has 100 apm, but BW players always end up getting very high apm.
Bisu Build 2.0 will teach you how to manage your army while doing drop play because you have to control your sairs and prevent them from getting killed by scourge/hydra/spores, you also need to focus on drops and micro managing squads of zealots/dts at each base.
It will also teach you how to manage ghosts, as protecting your HTs from mutas/hydras and psi-storming, is kind of like ghosts vs infestor.
Marine vs Lurker will teach you to do a million other things while still splitting your marines. Good marine split is one thing, but so many people do marine splits and then bank a ton of money, imagine doing marine splits while macroing your army.
Tank Marine vs Lurker ling = obvious. You learn to siege and unsiege tanks while doing a million other things.
Its a stretch but in the general sense of increasing mechanics, they should improve faster with BW.
So I'd like to try and learn BW but one thing that is holding me back is the fact theres only 800 people online right now according to ICCUP's website and I'm sure lots of those are koreans / top players with very very few being new players.
Is this information wrong? Is there a different server to play on?
On July 13 2011 05:35 Razith wrote: So I'd like to try and learn BW but one thing that is holding me back is the fact theres only 800 people online right now according to ICCUP's website and I'm sure lots of those are koreans / top players with very very few being new players.
Is this information wrong? Is there a different server to play on?
I'm pretty sure that ICCup is the biggest non-korean server. Most koreans go on Fish or Brain and are all really good. Most of the ICCup population is around D-/D/D+ (I think, this is from experience). In the top 10 right now on ICCup, 3 Koreans, 3 USA, 3 Poland, and 1 Russan. There are new/bad players on ICCup. You can also use the Practice Partner thread to play games against gamers your skill level too. The only other non-korean servers I can think of right now is the SC2GG server and VetServer. Both are really small with maybe less than 20 active players (the sc2gg forum is very much active though (^-^) ).
One thing I did when I started iccup around 5 months ago was PM everyone in the practice partner thread that was around my level. This helped jump start my friends list. After that it's all about (the channels) op teamliquid, and op sgs.
A very good thread for how to access Korean servers. It's totally common to get 30,000 players online. for fish, and Brain is always well populated too.
However, I rarely have trouble getting a game on ICCup, especially since I can create games.
Next video is up!! sorry for the delays all, I will be more prompt in future. Enjoy, plenty of feedback
Edit: and also, please leave feedback in this thread, as it will keep people looking and commenting which drives the project. Not that I don't love comments on youtube ^^
Hehe thank you Peterblue. Yeah, it just seems that people almost exclusively read the threads shown on the left, without paying much attention to the lower ones. Oh well, I'll keep coming out with more stuff. Back to focusing on individual points of the game now.
Your comment on self-driven improvement is so true. In BW I reckon there's this culture that you can improve by repeatedly smashing yourself against other players.
Dunno :/ Although these Videos are not bad, they lack something that gave me this "How on Earth did I miss this awesome Game for so many years !?" - Feeling I got when I started watching the early D9Ds during SC2 Beta. But I really cant tell what that something is... sry for beeing so vague :/
Yeah I'm sorry I'm not as awesome as Day9. I'm not being sarcastic; I am sorry.
But I don't have the luxury of 10 years of experience, and slowly working my way into it. I'm trying to come straight in and fill a gap, after only a coupla years playing. But I think I will get better.
Is there a way for someone to play something like ICCUP but with a mac? *Not necessarily ICCUP, a trying to get a good 1v1 b.net game is kind of difficult due to the fact most people only play minigames.
Imba/Elegant these are great videos and I really hope you keep making them! I think that considering you've just started your presentation skills are very good and you you seem to keenly understand how to maintain the viewer's interest.
Can't wait for the third episode because the BW community deserves such great content!
PS: I think you're every bit as awesome as Day9, and you've only just begun so stick with it man.
Mkay, time to make another video. This time, gonna be taking a look at a game, with extra focus on the reaver. Also a healthy dose of everything else in the match.
I've started the campaign lately, out of curiosity after watching your intro videos, and I have to say, I'm looking forward to getting into multiplayer as I haven't spent ten hours straight playing one game for ages. It takes a lot of patience to switch from grid to old layout, but I can see how much more fun it will be in real matches. That being said, I thank you very much sir. I'm looking forward to new videos - keep up the good work.
Don't you go promoting the protoss Need muta and vulture videos to undo this injustice. On a serious note nicely done, though you have the part 2 and 3 of the 3vid on youtube, but not linked in the OP...
On August 02 2011 11:53 Retgery wrote: I discovered that I sweat when I play BW...I didn't do that in sc2. Will you be doing any vids on Sim city, and wall-ins/
On August 02 2011 11:53 Retgery wrote: I discovered that I sweat when I play BW...I didn't do that in sc2. Will you be doing any vids on Sim city, and wall-ins/
Oh God, this. It's embarrassing how many dragoons I trap -_-
Absoloutely awesome stuff, exactly what I was looking for. Props to you man. The biggest problem I personally have is the max- unit selection, my 100~APM SC2 won't cut it here.
But again, thanks for the effort you're putting into this.
well i think imbatoss once you get more deeper into your program you could start listing the basics build order for each race to help them out I probably could help with terran but i am still in the process of going through all tsl2 and 1 terran build orders I tried following proleague build orders like flash but they keep switching around between units and keep focusing on the action only hence I can only guess what's his timing he puts the down the buildings and from the units he produced when the factory was put down or upgrades are being research.
Basically i think by doing that probably those really really new sc2 players could at least have basic fundamentals in starting out broodwar with build order of course having good b/o doesn't give you an automatic win .
On August 09 2011 18:38 ImbaTosS wrote: People are worried that I won't follow this project through- I will, but in reality I've just been pretty busy for a week or so.
Take your time man, this is a great idea. All I had to go on before was trying to use build orders on liquipedia and random snippets of advice on iccup :p
Hi, props for the project! as a sc2 player who is starting out in BW I feel the hardest thing to get from current resources is the typical game flow of a matchup. I.e. in SC2 ZvT, speedlings give map control to the zerg until T has hellions, that take map control until Z has mutas; zerg can get ahead in bases with mutas, but T can get faster 3rd if Z chooses to go infestor first, etc.
I have difficulty understanding how this works in BW; e.g. I have lost many TvZ to fast lurkers, so i try to get faster factory but then I am weaker to 3hatch muta, and in general i don't understand how to exploit muta-less zerg, or or a toss that doesnt tech past obververs, etc. I also see on liquipedia things like "2 fact pressure (in TvT) shoul leave you strong against 1 fact FE" while when I try it I am shut down by a couple tanks and all I have is a later expansion; I don't know what spider mines allow me to do, and so on.
Just hoping you might find some ideas in this. But in the meanwhile thanks a lot for your work!
Hi Elegant, firstly I'd like to disclaim that I support your initiative 100% (As I've already stated) and that this post has no discouraging or "I could do it better" innuendo to it. Please see it purely as food for thought.
While listening to the vulture video a few things stuck out for me. So here they are.
You might want to start introducing your audience to the damage types and unit sizes relevant to damage with these unit specific videos. Like where you said that vultures are good against lightly armoured units, which is not entirely true. As there is no "armoured" class in BW a la SCII and the vulture, being a high damage attack/low attack rate unit (tank, dragoon), is actually good against high armour units in theory as opposed to low damage/high rate units (marine, zergling). The reason this is not true in the game as far as the vulture is concerned is because they do concussive damage i.e. 50% damage to large and 75% to medium units. And this is why they are so good against workers and small/medium units. The fact that shields take full damage from all types of attack is also worth mentioning in this context.
Also afaik it takes 3 hits by a +0 vulture to kill a drone because it instantly heals 1hp after the first hit.
Missed larva trick in the zerg walling bit, since it's very easy to do and can augment the wall greatly. The Hat-Den-Hat wall is zealot proof but it is not hydra proof which can be very useful in keeping ones hydras alive and screwing over zealot AI in raids. But now I am just nitpicking.
Once again thanks for this project and I will be looking forward to your upcoming vids.
Thanks for your input, I'll take it on board. There are new vids coming, I'm just a little fatigued at the moment. Having to try to split and upload about 20 bugged out ISL commentary VODs atm as well
On August 22 2011 03:07 hellbound wrote: The reason this is not true in the game as far as the vulture is concerned is because they do concussive damage i.e. 50% damage to large and 75% to medium units.
Actually concussive is 25% to large and 50% to medium. Explosive is 50% to small and 75% to medium. Might be easiest just to link this page which also includes information about multiple attacks per animation and splash: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Damage#Types_of_Damage
can you PLZ PLZ make some post about z PLZ!!!!!!!!! cuzz z is so so hard to learn timeings cuzz of drones, thats why alot play only p, cuzz its eazy, same counts for unit control, but when they come in the higher ranks, there builds wont work cuzz they yust mess it up time and time again cuzz they dont know how to react, thats what happend to me,
On August 22 2011 03:07 hellbound wrote: The reason this is not true in the game as far as the vulture is concerned is because they do concussive damage i.e. 50% damage to large and 75% to medium units.
Actually concussive is 25% to large and 50% to medium. Explosive is 50% to small and 75% to medium. Might be easiest just to link this page which also includes information about multiple attacks per animation and splash: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Damage#Types_of_Damage
My bad, guess I got mixed up with explosive, well the point still stands.
Right, I'm sorry for the huge delay, but today or tomorrow comes another video. And I'll have moved house on Thursday, at which point they should be nice and regular.
On June 25 2011 07:14 Intr3pid wrote: Because it is mechanically much more demanding. It is more balanced and in my opinion sharpens your strategical thinking better than SC2. I still play BW more often than SC2, and the BW skills translate much better to SC2 than the other way around.
It would be very had to explain to someone who did not play Broodwar at a medium icc level (C+ for example).
There is a lot of satisfaction from a game well played on broodwar since there is much more ways you can screw up your build.
Also there are no "total nullifiers" in this game. The counters to other builds are strong, but its not one sided as in sc2. This allows to win games where you made a mistake on your judgement in build order, but your skill compensates for it.
I belive there is little skill can do for a 4 warpgate player vs cloack banshee (assuming terran has 2-3 bunkers at his ramp).
In general Broodwar stayed alive so long for a reason, and while many of us (broodwar-lovers) might not agree on what that reason exactly is, we know there is one :D.
I'll try to make one this weekend, since there's demand. I'm just ludicrously busy during the week, and busy-ish friday-monday. But yeah screw that, I'll put more out whenever I can.
Yea I agree, never seen this before but I think it should get more attention since with SOSPA and other things going on, I know there is more and more SC2 players coming to BW, even returning to BW some people might want to skim through this, Thanks!
I played my first game of BW in years (BGH against my friend doesn't count) against computer today. There's some neat info in these videos that I've used, though the rest is stuff I already know. Still, I skimmed through the first two and watched the last three, really enjoyed it and learned a few things I didn't know. Watching BW doesn't teach me the game, obviously.
Anyway, will pay attention to future videos if more are released!
can't this thread be sticky'd on front page of strategy/general BW forums? It would help a lot of people and possibly decrease the amount of shitty posts. Thank you.
EPT
. How can we fix this problem?
. 
![[image loading]](http://repdepot.net/img/thumbs/42648.jpg)
