|
On April 09 2012 06:10 Supah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 05:52 Bleak wrote:On April 09 2012 05:35 Gobe wrote:On April 09 2012 04:56 Bleak wrote:On April 09 2012 04:51 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 09 2012 04:47 Bleak wrote:On April 09 2012 04:46 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 09 2012 04:43 Bleak wrote:
6) There are tons more positional units and more units that can be increased in value with good micro. Aside from Sentry and Blink stalkers, there's really no Unit in SC2 that rewards good control.
do you even play sc2? what kind of stupid comment is this.... If you count carpet fungalling or stutter step as really things that reward good control, then as I've said, you really haven't watched BW enough (or any). Perhaps you would like to elaborate on what other units you think are there in SC2 that you can increase its value hugely with good control? all units require good control to maximize their benefit. saying that you can just 1a everything and get maximum benefit from units is just stupid. i played bw since 1998, and all of the blizzard games before then. it was a great game. You misunderstood me. I'm not saying the rest of the units don't shine with good control. They do. But a Blink upgrade or good Force Field control can really turn the tide of battle. The ability and the upgrade takes those units and elavates them way more then their main intended combat use. Day9 explained this it nicely in a daily with values etc. If your opponent has 50 marines and you have 50 banelings it doesn't really matter how much you split. Yes I've seen Foxer, now MKP split insanely and it's nice to watch, but I've seen countless many games where banelings just crash in and Marines fall like dominos. Alternatively, it doesn't matter what you can do with say, Marines versus Fungal Growth. You get Fungalled and you die. That's it. Forcefield is kinda the same, but it is way harder (still not insanely harder) to pull of than a fungal. When Z attacks you with 40 roaches at 12min and when you are only 120 supply as Protoss, those FF need to be really good so that you can survive. And when that's pulled off, that is amazing. There aren't many things like this in SC2. Then again these are my opinions and people are free to believe what they want. Yeah it's a little hard to understand why a more expensive unit (baneling) which is a heavy to counters the marine, actually counters the marine. And you'll will be so much more cost effective anyways with your micro. But there are so many of these situations in SC2 where it feels like "Oh okay, so he's made that unit and I don't have X, I'm most likely dead OR my units will be useless against that unit". Immortal vs armored, Marauder vs armored, Colossus versus pretty much anything on ground, Thors against Mutalisks, Blue flame hellions against lings etc. the list goes on you get the idea. So much rock, paper, scissors. For example Irradiate, a spell cast from a flying spellcaster unit of Terran in BW is the Muta killer (since Zerg players clump their Mutalisks to the maximum to attack in the most efficient and safe way as possible) One Irradiate and the clump takes a lot of damage, BUT, a good Zerg player will remove the affected Mutalisk from the group before the whole stack is doomed and continue with the harrass. You got caught clumped against a couple Thors? You lose that Mutalisk pack and there's nothing you can do but preemptively spit the unit, which makes it more vulnerable to a thousand many things and is boring to watch. It is beautiful to watch great Mutalisk control in BW, a cloud of mutalisks clumped on a single point darting in and out, spewing destruction on anything they can bite. A couple of spider mines can kill probably something like 20 Zerglings in one shot (perhaps even more, not that knowledable about the rate of stacking of Zerglings in a close bunch, have to check) BUT, Zerg player can bring an overlord to spot them and pick them off with Hydralisks. Lurkers decimate Marines. It's even worse than Banelings, it's basically a Baneling launcher attacking in a straight line, but it stays where it is and keeps attacking instead of dying when it does its thing. BUT, Terran players can scan, bring a Science Vessel for detection, and try their luck with better splitting. It is this dynamic "This can hurt but maybe I can get around it with this if I control well" is what makes BW really good to watch. By comparison, if you get caught against a big bunch of blue flame hellions with zerglings, unless you outnumber them heavily, there's almost nothing you can do. Those Zerglings will die. You either need roaches (brings us back to rock-paper-scissors), something flying, or Spine Crawlers (or Ultralisks  ) Spine crawlers are immobile, and if you don't already have Mutalisks, you can't do shit with just ling/bling. You do realize that for every BW example (sans the Mutalisk one, which would be comparable to Hunter Seeker Missile directly), you're using multiple units to counteract the same supposed problem. Lings with no Hydra Suppoert taking on Spider Mines? Naked Marines (in larger numbers) taking on Lurkers in an entrenched position with no support? Ling/Bling with Infestor support is fairly decent against mass BF Hellions if you spread, control, and flank well. Lurkers are immobile, Roach Lair is gotten often now (it has the added benefit of a strong all in, a good timing attack, or just a small number of Roaches to deflect Hellions, all three are wildly different in goal). While you may think you're making a decent point, it's a simplistic point at best and you're using two rulers instead of one. @OP Great post, will try to answer you later (though I suck with VODs, so I'l just point you in the right direction, hopefully).
Ofcourse lingbling with infestor support is good against Hellions. That's why my initial example was just between two units, to demonstrate situations where one unit is completely awesome against some and horribly bad against others. That situation doesn't happen nearly as much in BW.
|
"I don't like SC2 as much as BW. I want someone to verbally explain, in detail, the subtle aspects of SC2 that will convince me it is better than BW. Then back those up arguments up with VODs that correlate exactly to their points. Then, when they do, I'll ignore them. Oh, and btw, I don't play SC2."
|
On April 09 2012 06:04 deafhobbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:01 Fyrewolf wrote:
You say you started watching BW in 2009. As someone who played since vanilla 1.00, I have to say that all 3 of your points are ignorant of the history that starcraft actually has. At the beginning of starcraft, 1 base play was standard. People even argued about whether expanding was even worth it, and about things like if maynarding your workers was even worth it, something that is taken for granted now. Muta micro was nonexistant. There was no refinement like there is now. SC2 is still a relatively new game, and we have had the chance to be part of its growth.
Just now we are seeing amazing strategic plays coming out of greta players, with very good micro, much faster than we did in starcraft. As to battles being quicker, SC2 is designed and meant to be faster paced than BW. Would slowing down the battles into slo-motion be more flashy? Sure, everything is better in slow motion, but it would inversely make it less intense. Just because the battle is faster doesn't make it less enjoyable. You are glued to the screen waiting for that intense moment when the battle occurs and you see the magic occur in a very short span. This sort of thing is something that was highly regarded in BW as well, for example in Boxer vs Chusung, where Boxer locked down 7 stacked Battlecruisers in ONE(!) second by hotkeying each one seperately, for which he won a pimpest play award. Even other sports often come down to a single important moment that is incredibly intense. Football is very much such a game where it is a game of moments, or many times a fighting tournament that ends in a single moment when an fighter is knocked out.
Micro had to evolve after a period of time for starcraft, as it has for SC2. Early on in both games there was a ton of 1a(2a3a4a5a6a7a8a8a9a0a), but there is plenty of micro going on in SC2. We see individual stalkers blink away in fights, packs of marines splitting, individual marines stimmed and scouting army flanks, small packs of marauders running to pick off high templar, multipronged harasses, all sorts of good feats of micro occuring. I would argue that micro was something we didn't see as much of in BW as in SC2, because macroing took up so much more of your apm in BW. To be able to macro properly while microing was the real feat, as the person who fell behind in the macro game would just lose to the reinforcement army being bigger than his. Do you know why iloveoov was called "Cheater Terran"? No matter how well you microed against him, he would always have more units at home than he should have been able to have, because his macro was so good.
TL;DR
Point 1: It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough.
Point 2: The battles are supposed to be faster, the game is faster paced. It's still enjoyable, and more intense.
Point 3. It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough again, and it is arguably going to be even bigger and more important than in BW.
It's not like we could expect everyone to pick up SC2 and immediately play it at a level of BW, a game that has a decade of experience behind it. They're different and you should have expected it to take time to grow. Even if you don't see 100% what you are looking for right now, if you see the potential for it, then you should watch SC2. I assure you that the things you want are already there, though the game is in a different format, a faster-paced higher-energy spectacle. And if you can't get over the new design of it being faster, then you should just stick with the design of the old game you like, there's nothing wrong with that either. I'm aware of the history of BW, but how the game was played in 2000 has nothing to do with what i enjoy about the game today. It has even less to do with my enjoyment of SC2, whether or not the game will be better tomorrow doesn't really influence my enjoyment of it today. Again, VOD's would be appreciated. Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:03 Troxle wrote:
No offense to the OP. But your comments on the Flash and Fantasy games are the same reason you said you didn't like StarCraft 2. Flash set up a contain on Fantasy and through quick thinkin' Fantasy used other advantages he had to stop the drop. I've seen the equivalent in StarCraft 2 with Terran contains and Zerg usin' Nydus Worm or Roach Burrow Movement to get around it, or infested Terran to slowly pick away at the contain while movin' the army in a way to break out and exploit a weakened Terran who just lost a large chunk of forces. I've watched Terran versus Terran and one Terran does drops in the back ground, loads his entire army in Medivacs and lands directly ontop of the deployed siege tank contain and slowly takes it down.
That bein' said, I will agree that StarCraft 2 is a faster game in the sense, fights go much quicker, which makes micro an even more important part of StarCraft 2. Fights tend to happen in larger engagements (part of the reason for these faster fights). For any Brood War veterans, we remember the small scale battles that happened seemingly everywhere all the time. That can make for a more excitin' time. But at the same time StarCraft 2 harassment fills that gap. Players like WhiteRa and his Warp Prism make these small scale engagements more common. Terran droppin' multiple locations while pushin' the front. These might not be exactly the same as a 30 minute Brood War game that has constant battles over the map all game, but in my opinion that is just borin'. I'd rather watch StarCraft 2 mid game where you start to see players takin' pokes here to see how much they can get away with, their builds start to really form, etc...Brood War is fun to watch a game here or there, but it just gets borin' to watch small scale fight after small scale fight the entire time with no real time to take a breather.
In the end: StarCraft 2 and Brood War are separate games and its like comparin' oranges to apples. They are both real time strategy games made by the same company, but the differences between the games are too vast. There will be people who prefer Brood War to StarCraft 2 and vice versa. First off, spoilers on FvF Second, the example was mainly to demonstrate the scale at which stuff happens in BW. Things like maneuver and unit placement halfway across the map influencing a fight. Thanks for the comments about harassment, I'll look out for it more.
You are just dismissive of everyone aren't you?
You say you are watching the IPL right now. Every example of those feats of micro in SC2 I talked about was shown there during the tournament, to prove the example that the things you say are lacking are actually there in SC2 right now. To be dismissive of everyone and say that SC2 is lacking in strategy or micro still today is just ignorant.
You didn't even respond to a single point in either of the posts you quoted.
What a terrible post that is.
|
On April 09 2012 06:19 mynameisgreat11 wrote:
"I don't like SC2 as much as BW. I want someone to verbally explain, in detail, the subtle aspects of SC2 that will convince me it is better than BW. Then back those up arguments up with VODs that correlate exactly to their points. Then, when they do, I'll ignore them. Oh, and btw, I don't play SC2."
When have i ignored someone? Every time someone's brought up a VOD, I've thanked them and filed it away to watch later. Moreover, lots of people watch games they don't play.
On April 09 2012 06:19 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:04 deafhobbit wrote:On April 09 2012 06:01 Fyrewolf wrote:
You say you started watching BW in 2009. As someone who played since vanilla 1.00, I have to say that all 3 of your points are ignorant of the history that starcraft actually has. At the beginning of starcraft, 1 base play was standard. People even argued about whether expanding was even worth it, and about things like if maynarding your workers was even worth it, something that is taken for granted now. Muta micro was nonexistant. There was no refinement like there is now. SC2 is still a relatively new game, and we have had the chance to be part of its growth.
Just now we are seeing amazing strategic plays coming out of greta players, with very good micro, much faster than we did in starcraft. As to battles being quicker, SC2 is designed and meant to be faster paced than BW. Would slowing down the battles into slo-motion be more flashy? Sure, everything is better in slow motion, but it would inversely make it less intense. Just because the battle is faster doesn't make it less enjoyable. You are glued to the screen waiting for that intense moment when the battle occurs and you see the magic occur in a very short span. This sort of thing is something that was highly regarded in BW as well, for example in Boxer vs Chusung, where Boxer locked down 7 stacked Battlecruisers in ONE(!) second by hotkeying each one seperately, for which he won a pimpest play award. Even other sports often come down to a single important moment that is incredibly intense. Football is very much such a game where it is a game of moments, or many times a fighting tournament that ends in a single moment when an fighter is knocked out.
Micro had to evolve after a period of time for starcraft, as it has for SC2. Early on in both games there was a ton of 1a(2a3a4a5a6a7a8a8a9a0a), but there is plenty of micro going on in SC2. We see individual stalkers blink away in fights, packs of marines splitting, individual marines stimmed and scouting army flanks, small packs of marauders running to pick off high templar, multipronged harasses, all sorts of good feats of micro occuring. I would argue that micro was something we didn't see as much of in BW as in SC2, because macroing took up so much more of your apm in BW. To be able to macro properly while microing was the real feat, as the person who fell behind in the macro game would just lose to the reinforcement army being bigger than his. Do you know why iloveoov was called "Cheater Terran"? No matter how well you microed against him, he would always have more units at home than he should have been able to have, because his macro was so good.
TL;DR
Point 1: It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough.
Point 2: The battles are supposed to be faster, the game is faster paced. It's still enjoyable, and more intense.
Point 3. It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough again, and it is arguably going to be even bigger and more important than in BW.
It's not like we could expect everyone to pick up SC2 and immediately play it at a level of BW, a game that has a decade of experience behind it. They're different and you should have expected it to take time to grow. Even if you don't see 100% what you are looking for right now, if you see the potential for it, then you should watch SC2. I assure you that the things you want are already there, though the game is in a different format, a faster-paced higher-energy spectacle. And if you can't get over the new design of it being faster, then you should just stick with the design of the old game you like, there's nothing wrong with that either. I'm aware of the history of BW, but how the game was played in 2000 has nothing to do with what i enjoy about the game today. It has even less to do with my enjoyment of SC2, whether or not the game will be better tomorrow doesn't really influence my enjoyment of it today. Again, VOD's would be appreciated. On April 09 2012 06:03 Troxle wrote:
No offense to the OP. But your comments on the Flash and Fantasy games are the same reason you said you didn't like StarCraft 2. Flash set up a contain on Fantasy and through quick thinkin' Fantasy used other advantages he had to stop the drop. I've seen the equivalent in StarCraft 2 with Terran contains and Zerg usin' Nydus Worm or Roach Burrow Movement to get around it, or infested Terran to slowly pick away at the contain while movin' the army in a way to break out and exploit a weakened Terran who just lost a large chunk of forces. I've watched Terran versus Terran and one Terran does drops in the back ground, loads his entire army in Medivacs and lands directly ontop of the deployed siege tank contain and slowly takes it down.
That bein' said, I will agree that StarCraft 2 is a faster game in the sense, fights go much quicker, which makes micro an even more important part of StarCraft 2. Fights tend to happen in larger engagements (part of the reason for these faster fights). For any Brood War veterans, we remember the small scale battles that happened seemingly everywhere all the time. That can make for a more excitin' time. But at the same time StarCraft 2 harassment fills that gap. Players like WhiteRa and his Warp Prism make these small scale engagements more common. Terran droppin' multiple locations while pushin' the front. These might not be exactly the same as a 30 minute Brood War game that has constant battles over the map all game, but in my opinion that is just borin'. I'd rather watch StarCraft 2 mid game where you start to see players takin' pokes here to see how much they can get away with, their builds start to really form, etc...Brood War is fun to watch a game here or there, but it just gets borin' to watch small scale fight after small scale fight the entire time with no real time to take a breather.
In the end: StarCraft 2 and Brood War are separate games and its like comparin' oranges to apples. They are both real time strategy games made by the same company, but the differences between the games are too vast. There will be people who prefer Brood War to StarCraft 2 and vice versa. First off, spoilers on FvF Second, the example was mainly to demonstrate the scale at which stuff happens in BW. Things like maneuver and unit placement halfway across the map influencing a fight. Thanks for the comments about harassment, I'll look out for it more. You are just dismissive of everyone aren't you? You say you are watching the IPL right now. Every example of those feats of micro in SC2 I talked about was shown there during the tournament, to prove the example that the things you say are lacking are actually there in SC2 right now. To be dismissive of everyone and say that SC2 is lacking in strategy or micro still today is just ignorant. You didn't even respond to a single point in either of the posts you quoted. What a terrible post that is.
Like i say in a later reply, I'm more focused on keeping the discussion in this thread civil than keeping an eye on the details of the IPL game. I only responded to the points i felt needed responding to, and thank you for pointing out details i may have missed. In what way am i being dismissive?
|
This is a dangerous thread which will most likely deteriorate into the usual flame war, however i will throw in my opinion all the same.
I myself never really played BW that much, and only started taking an interest with the release of SC2, however i do agree with most of your points. I prefer watch BW games to Sc2 games as i really can see the difference in skill and tactics.
Just today i watched a game of SSak v Crazy Hydra, where CH fought back to win the game from what looked like a lost cause. Had the game been SC2 he would never have fought his way back and win. I really do think SC2 is way too much of a coin flip in nature , but do hope the expansions resolve this problem.
We shall never know until we get a few more years of gameplay behind us i guess
|
Funny, just as I'm reading this thread with statements that it's just 1A ball fights and not multiple things going on at the same time I see + Show Spoiler +Stephano pop out roaches in both Nestea's main and natural mineral lines while attacking at the front at the same time and pull out a win.
|
On April 09 2012 06:20 deafhobbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:19 mynameisgreat11 wrote:
"I don't like SC2 as much as BW. I want someone to verbally explain, in detail, the subtle aspects of SC2 that will convince me it is better than BW. Then back those up arguments up with VODs that correlate exactly to their points. Then, when they do, I'll ignore them. Oh, and btw, I don't play SC2." When have i ignored someone? Every time someone's brought up a VOD, I've thanked them and filed it away to watch later.
Bleak, Fyrewolf, and Daphreak. That was one page worth.
Fyrewolf gave a very good explanation for each point you brought up. You seem ignorant of SC2, thinking that there is no strategy and no micro.
If you think that, thats fine, you don't like SC2 very much. Cool. Accept that you will not be convinced otherwise. Or stop trolling.
|
nestea vs stephano game that just ended
theres your positioning and splitting armies and all that jazz
Or stop trolling.
he's not trolling, he's just being passive aggressive, dismissive, condescending, and constantly repeating "evidence pls" "point me to VODs please" "i want to enjoy sc2 now" oh wait that is trolling? you dont say.
|
On April 09 2012 06:21 Topdoller wrote:
This is a dangerous thread which will most likely deteriorate into the usual flame war, however i will throw in my opinion all the same.
I myself never really played BW that much, and only started taking an interest with the release of SC2, however i do agree with most of your points. I prefer watch BW games to Sc2 games as i really can see the difference in skill and tactics.
Just today i watched a game of SSak v Crazy Hydra, where CH fought back to win the game from what looked like a lost cause. Had the game been SC2 he would never have fought his way back and win. I really do think SC2 is way too much of a coin flip in nature , but do hope the expansions resolve this problem.
We shall never know until we get a few more years of gameplay behind us i guess
It probably will go downhill eventually, but my hope is by actively posting and attempting to keep things civil some good might still come from it before that happens.
On April 09 2012 06:24 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:20 deafhobbit wrote:On April 09 2012 06:19 mynameisgreat11 wrote:
"I don't like SC2 as much as BW. I want someone to verbally explain, in detail, the subtle aspects of SC2 that will convince me it is better than BW. Then back those up arguments up with VODs that correlate exactly to their points. Then, when they do, I'll ignore them. Oh, and btw, I don't play SC2." When have i ignored someone? Every time someone's brought up a VOD, I've thanked them and filed it away to watch later. Bleak, Fyrewolf, and Daphreak. That was one page worth. Fyrewolf gave a very good explanation for each point you brought up. You seem ignorant of SC2, thinking that there is no strategy and no micro. If you think that, thats fine, you don't like SC2 very much. Cool. Accept that you will not be convinced otherwise. Or stop trolling.
Yes, i am ignorant of SC2. That's why i made this thread.
Also, he said i ignored people who posted VODS, and to the best of my knowledge I've thanked all of them. If i missed some I'm sorry, and i hope the profuse thanks I've given to other vod posters have been noticed.
Also, since when does engaging in polite discussion qualify as trolling?
|
Did u see that last game? Wont u say that this micro is brillant? Isnt good? Perhaps not on par with bw but man this was so cool
|
On April 09 2012 06:23 Logros wrote:Funny, just as I'm reading this thread with statements that it's just 1A ball fights and not multiple things going on at the same time I see + Show Spoiler +Stephano pop out roaches in both Nestea's main and natural mineral lines while attacking at the front at the same time and pull out a win.
OP is too busy keeping this thread civil rather than watching IPL as he has said many times before. we have to convince him with words that SC2 is fun to watch rather than him watching.
|
United Kingdom38256 Posts
This still didn't get moved to blogs?
|
I'm going to convince him that chocolate pie tastes good by making a powerpoint.
|
OP is too busy keeping this thread civil rather than watching IPL as he has said many times before. we have to convince him with words that SC2 is fun to watch rather than him watching.
OP is too busy trying to troll and make it look like he isn't trolling to watch SC2.
|
On April 09 2012 06:15 Ercster wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 04:37 FuRRyChoBo wrote:On April 09 2012 04:30 Ercster wrote:On April 09 2012 04:25 FuRRyChoBo wrote:
It's a really rough transition to make because as a Brood War fan (I played BW semi-religiously from 1998-2010), you expect SC2 to match, or at least come close to, what Brood War meant to you. Not only does SC2 not have the history, but the dynamics of the game are different:
1) Economic harass is much less effective since workers return fewer minerals per trip and can be replenished much more quickly.
2) Splash damage is much more prevalent, and micro-negating spells are unavoidable.
3) Both macro and micro are easier, but coming from the same approach that you seem to be, even "incredible" micro in SC2 does not come anywhere near how watching a BW legend feels, even on a bad day.
4) The BW term "strategic play" has become "cheese," and it isn't punished nearly as hard as it is in BW because of inject/chrono boost/mules.
This is how I felt about the game when I first transitioned after finding it impossible to play BW on my new PC. I've developed these opinions a little bit more and I still conclusively feel that BW is, and will always be, the better game, but SC2 is a pretty good replacement if there has to be one. Also, you have to compare SC2 to 98'-00' BW and not BW now. Not necessarily the case. Brood War couldn't save replays until May of 2001, which is a feature that was implemented from the start with SC2. Sharing replays develops the game exponentially faster than simply playing and figuring things out on your own. Also, there could easily be weeks or months between televised games back during the KPGA and early OGN days (Tooniverse, Hanbitsoft, etc), and the VODs were borderline impossible to find. If I had to quantify it, I'd guess SC2 is roughly around the 2005-2006 era BW simply because of all the information sharing and sheer amount of games being played constantly. This isn't relevant to my post or the OP.
It's directly relevant to your post because you're speaking in terms of the game's development. Starcraft 2 is going to develop and get "figured out" much faster than BW because of the technology and the communities being already established. I have no clue how you don't see how what I said is responding to what you said.
|
This IPL4 has had some fantastic games mind you, there is hope !!!!!
|
On April 09 2012 06:13 deafhobbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:11 KrazyTrumpet wrote:On April 09 2012 06:04 deafhobbit wrote:On April 09 2012 06:01 Fyrewolf wrote:
You say you started watching BW in 2009. As someone who played since vanilla 1.00, I have to say that all 3 of your points are ignorant of the history that starcraft actually has. At the beginning of starcraft, 1 base play was standard. People even argued about whether expanding was even worth it, and about things like if maynarding your workers was even worth it, something that is taken for granted now. Muta micro was nonexistant. There was no refinement like there is now. SC2 is still a relatively new game, and we have had the chance to be part of its growth.
Just now we are seeing amazing strategic plays coming out of greta players, with very good micro, much faster than we did in starcraft. As to battles being quicker, SC2 is designed and meant to be faster paced than BW. Would slowing down the battles into slo-motion be more flashy? Sure, everything is better in slow motion, but it would inversely make it less intense. Just because the battle is faster doesn't make it less enjoyable. You are glued to the screen waiting for that intense moment when the battle occurs and you see the magic occur in a very short span. This sort of thing is something that was highly regarded in BW as well, for example in Boxer vs Chusung, where Boxer locked down 7 stacked Battlecruisers in ONE(!) second by hotkeying each one seperately, for which he won a pimpest play award. Even other sports often come down to a single important moment that is incredibly intense. Football is very much such a game where it is a game of moments, or many times a fighting tournament that ends in a single moment when an fighter is knocked out.
Micro had to evolve after a period of time for starcraft, as it has for SC2. Early on in both games there was a ton of 1a(2a3a4a5a6a7a8a8a9a0a), but there is plenty of micro going on in SC2. We see individual stalkers blink away in fights, packs of marines splitting, individual marines stimmed and scouting army flanks, small packs of marauders running to pick off high templar, multipronged harasses, all sorts of good feats of micro occuring. I would argue that micro was something we didn't see as much of in BW as in SC2, because macroing took up so much more of your apm in BW. To be able to macro properly while microing was the real feat, as the person who fell behind in the macro game would just lose to the reinforcement army being bigger than his. Do you know why iloveoov was called "Cheater Terran"? No matter how well you microed against him, he would always have more units at home than he should have been able to have, because his macro was so good.
TL;DR
Point 1: It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough.
Point 2: The battles are supposed to be faster, the game is faster paced. It's still enjoyable, and more intense.
Point 3. It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough again, and it is arguably going to be even bigger and more important than in BW.
It's not like we could expect everyone to pick up SC2 and immediately play it at a level of BW, a game that has a decade of experience behind it. They're different and you should have expected it to take time to grow. Even if you don't see 100% what you are looking for right now, if you see the potential for it, then you should watch SC2. I assure you that the things you want are already there, though the game is in a different format, a faster-paced higher-energy spectacle. And if you can't get over the new design of it being faster, then you should just stick with the design of the old game you like, there's nothing wrong with that either. I'm aware of the history of BW, but how the game was played in 2000 has nothing to do with what i enjoy about the game today. It has even less to do with my enjoyment of SC2, whether or not the game will be better tomorrow doesn't really influence my enjoyment of it today. Again, VOD's would be appreciated. On April 09 2012 06:03 Troxle wrote:
No offense to the OP. But your comments on the Flash and Fantasy games are the same reason you said you didn't like StarCraft 2. Flash set up a contain on Fantasy and through quick thinkin' Fantasy used other advantages he had to stop the drop. I've seen the equivalent in StarCraft 2 with Terran contains and Zerg usin' Nydus Worm or Roach Burrow Movement to get around it, or infested Terran to slowly pick away at the contain while movin' the army in a way to break out and exploit a weakened Terran who just lost a large chunk of forces. I've watched Terran versus Terran and one Terran does drops in the back ground, loads his entire army in Medivacs and lands directly ontop of the deployed siege tank contain and slowly takes it down.
That bein' said, I will agree that StarCraft 2 is a faster game in the sense, fights go much quicker, which makes micro an even more important part of StarCraft 2. Fights tend to happen in larger engagements (part of the reason for these faster fights). For any Brood War veterans, we remember the small scale battles that happened seemingly everywhere all the time. That can make for a more excitin' time. But at the same time StarCraft 2 harassment fills that gap. Players like WhiteRa and his Warp Prism make these small scale engagements more common. Terran droppin' multiple locations while pushin' the front. These might not be exactly the same as a 30 minute Brood War game that has constant battles over the map all game, but in my opinion that is just borin'. I'd rather watch StarCraft 2 mid game where you start to see players takin' pokes here to see how much they can get away with, their builds start to really form, etc...Brood War is fun to watch a game here or there, but it just gets borin' to watch small scale fight after small scale fight the entire time with no real time to take a breather.
In the end: StarCraft 2 and Brood War are separate games and its like comparin' oranges to apples. They are both real time strategy games made by the same company, but the differences between the games are too vast. There will be people who prefer Brood War to StarCraft 2 and vice versa. First off, spoilers on FvF Second, the example was mainly to demonstrate the scale at which stuff happens in BW. Things like maneuver and unit placement halfway across the map influencing a fight. Thanks for the comments about harassment, I'll look out for it more. Then come back to SC2 in a couple years...? I don't really know what you want. SC2 is still super new and things are only just now developing. SC2 teams were not the established power houses that BW teams have had the luxury of being for several years now, so they're only just now starting to be able to have proper training and whatnot, and it's beginning to show in the quality of games. BW had YEARS to develop to the point it was when you started watching, and you seem to demand that SC2 be at the same level after only 2, and it won't be... Again, I want to be able to enjoy SC2 today, not in a few years. Also, I've seen SC2 improve substantially in the time I've watched it, but i think two years in the "it's a new game" argument is getting a little stale.
Well considering your "demands" of what you want from the game, you won't be able to enjoy the game today. Again, how long did it take BW to be balanced and therefore consistently watchable? Much longer than 2 years.
|
On April 09 2012 06:24 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:23 Logros wrote:Funny, just as I'm reading this thread with statements that it's just 1A ball fights and not multiple things going on at the same time I see + Show Spoiler +Stephano pop out roaches in both Nestea's main and natural mineral lines while attacking at the front at the same time and pull out a win. OP is too busy keeping this thread civil rather than watching IPL as he has said many times before. we have to convince him with words that SC2 is fun to watch rather than him watching.
Think of this way - the longer people keep making good VOD recommendations, the more games i can watch later. What's better, seeing one game now that may (and by the posts in this thread, apparently has) turn out good, or getting 3-4 more good games to watch later.
On April 09 2012 06:28 KrazyTrumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:13 deafhobbit wrote:On April 09 2012 06:11 KrazyTrumpet wrote:On April 09 2012 06:04 deafhobbit wrote:On April 09 2012 06:01 Fyrewolf wrote:
You say you started watching BW in 2009. As someone who played since vanilla 1.00, I have to say that all 3 of your points are ignorant of the history that starcraft actually has. At the beginning of starcraft, 1 base play was standard. People even argued about whether expanding was even worth it, and about things like if maynarding your workers was even worth it, something that is taken for granted now. Muta micro was nonexistant. There was no refinement like there is now. SC2 is still a relatively new game, and we have had the chance to be part of its growth.
Just now we are seeing amazing strategic plays coming out of greta players, with very good micro, much faster than we did in starcraft. As to battles being quicker, SC2 is designed and meant to be faster paced than BW. Would slowing down the battles into slo-motion be more flashy? Sure, everything is better in slow motion, but it would inversely make it less intense. Just because the battle is faster doesn't make it less enjoyable. You are glued to the screen waiting for that intense moment when the battle occurs and you see the magic occur in a very short span. This sort of thing is something that was highly regarded in BW as well, for example in Boxer vs Chusung, where Boxer locked down 7 stacked Battlecruisers in ONE(!) second by hotkeying each one seperately, for which he won a pimpest play award. Even other sports often come down to a single important moment that is incredibly intense. Football is very much such a game where it is a game of moments, or many times a fighting tournament that ends in a single moment when an fighter is knocked out.
Micro had to evolve after a period of time for starcraft, as it has for SC2. Early on in both games there was a ton of 1a(2a3a4a5a6a7a8a8a9a0a), but there is plenty of micro going on in SC2. We see individual stalkers blink away in fights, packs of marines splitting, individual marines stimmed and scouting army flanks, small packs of marauders running to pick off high templar, multipronged harasses, all sorts of good feats of micro occuring. I would argue that micro was something we didn't see as much of in BW as in SC2, because macroing took up so much more of your apm in BW. To be able to macro properly while microing was the real feat, as the person who fell behind in the macro game would just lose to the reinforcement army being bigger than his. Do you know why iloveoov was called "Cheater Terran"? No matter how well you microed against him, he would always have more units at home than he should have been able to have, because his macro was so good.
TL;DR
Point 1: It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough.
Point 2: The battles are supposed to be faster, the game is faster paced. It's still enjoyable, and more intense.
Point 3. It's there, you just aren't looking hard enough again, and it is arguably going to be even bigger and more important than in BW.
It's not like we could expect everyone to pick up SC2 and immediately play it at a level of BW, a game that has a decade of experience behind it. They're different and you should have expected it to take time to grow. Even if you don't see 100% what you are looking for right now, if you see the potential for it, then you should watch SC2. I assure you that the things you want are already there, though the game is in a different format, a faster-paced higher-energy spectacle. And if you can't get over the new design of it being faster, then you should just stick with the design of the old game you like, there's nothing wrong with that either. I'm aware of the history of BW, but how the game was played in 2000 has nothing to do with what i enjoy about the game today. It has even less to do with my enjoyment of SC2, whether or not the game will be better tomorrow doesn't really influence my enjoyment of it today. Again, VOD's would be appreciated. On April 09 2012 06:03 Troxle wrote:
No offense to the OP. But your comments on the Flash and Fantasy games are the same reason you said you didn't like StarCraft 2. Flash set up a contain on Fantasy and through quick thinkin' Fantasy used other advantages he had to stop the drop. I've seen the equivalent in StarCraft 2 with Terran contains and Zerg usin' Nydus Worm or Roach Burrow Movement to get around it, or infested Terran to slowly pick away at the contain while movin' the army in a way to break out and exploit a weakened Terran who just lost a large chunk of forces. I've watched Terran versus Terran and one Terran does drops in the back ground, loads his entire army in Medivacs and lands directly ontop of the deployed siege tank contain and slowly takes it down.
That bein' said, I will agree that StarCraft 2 is a faster game in the sense, fights go much quicker, which makes micro an even more important part of StarCraft 2. Fights tend to happen in larger engagements (part of the reason for these faster fights). For any Brood War veterans, we remember the small scale battles that happened seemingly everywhere all the time. That can make for a more excitin' time. But at the same time StarCraft 2 harassment fills that gap. Players like WhiteRa and his Warp Prism make these small scale engagements more common. Terran droppin' multiple locations while pushin' the front. These might not be exactly the same as a 30 minute Brood War game that has constant battles over the map all game, but in my opinion that is just borin'. I'd rather watch StarCraft 2 mid game where you start to see players takin' pokes here to see how much they can get away with, their builds start to really form, etc...Brood War is fun to watch a game here or there, but it just gets borin' to watch small scale fight after small scale fight the entire time with no real time to take a breather.
In the end: StarCraft 2 and Brood War are separate games and its like comparin' oranges to apples. They are both real time strategy games made by the same company, but the differences between the games are too vast. There will be people who prefer Brood War to StarCraft 2 and vice versa. First off, spoilers on FvF Second, the example was mainly to demonstrate the scale at which stuff happens in BW. Things like maneuver and unit placement halfway across the map influencing a fight. Thanks for the comments about harassment, I'll look out for it more. Then come back to SC2 in a couple years...? I don't really know what you want. SC2 is still super new and things are only just now developing. SC2 teams were not the established power houses that BW teams have had the luxury of being for several years now, so they're only just now starting to be able to have proper training and whatnot, and it's beginning to show in the quality of games. BW had YEARS to develop to the point it was when you started watching, and you seem to demand that SC2 be at the same level after only 2, and it won't be... Again, I want to be able to enjoy SC2 today, not in a few years. Also, I've seen SC2 improve substantially in the time I've watched it, but i think two years in the "it's a new game" argument is getting a little stale. Well considering your "demands" of what you want from the game, you won't be able to enjoy the game today. Again, how long did it take BW to be balanced and therefore consistently watchable? Much longer than 2 years.
Where am i making demands? I'm asking you for help appreciating the game you enjoy, after having explained what has given me trouble doing so.
|
On April 09 2012 06:28 deafhobbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:24 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 09 2012 06:23 Logros wrote:Funny, just as I'm reading this thread with statements that it's just 1A ball fights and not multiple things going on at the same time I see + Show Spoiler +Stephano pop out roaches in both Nestea's main and natural mineral lines while attacking at the front at the same time and pull out a win. OP is too busy keeping this thread civil rather than watching IPL as he has said many times before. we have to convince him with words that SC2 is fun to watch rather than him watching. Think of this way - the longer people keep making good VOD recommendations, the more games i can watch later. What's better, seeing one game now that may (and by the posts in this thread, apparently has) turn out good, or getting 3-4 more good games to watch later.
posting in this thread is not as good as watching IPL.
|
On April 09 2012 06:24 deafhobbit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 06:21 Topdoller wrote:
This is a dangerous thread which will most likely deteriorate into the usual flame war, however i will throw in my opinion all the same.
I myself never really played BW that much, and only started taking an interest with the release of SC2, however i do agree with most of your points. I prefer watch BW games to Sc2 games as i really can see the difference in skill and tactics.
Just today i watched a game of SSak v Crazy Hydra, where CH fought back to win the game from what looked like a lost cause. Had the game been SC2 he would never have fought his way back and win. I really do think SC2 is way too much of a coin flip in nature , but do hope the expansions resolve this problem.
We shall never know until we get a few more years of gameplay behind us i guess It probably will go downhill eventually, but my hope is by actively posting and attempting to keep things civil some good might still come from it before that happens.
I think you did quite a good job so far. Problem is you will have to sleep eventually.
There should be heavily moderated threads for these BW/SC2-things. Maybe some kind of liquipedia (also, curated). With discussion before something is posted. Maybe a "post once in 24h"-thread ? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
