|
On May 22 2011 20:55 shaman6ix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2011 22:41 Noelani wrote:
It was (actually still is) a major problem in broodwar that the game is so mechanically demanding. It has a terrible UI and unit AI. Just because SC2 has fixed these problems doesn't make it an "easier" game. It simply requires a different skillset. Instead of the top players being able to win purely on mechanics, you actually have to use *gasp* strategy, to win an RTS game.
It's not that it requires no practice or that it's easy to get to the top at all. You still have to have extremely good mechanics to compete in the first place, which right now really only a couple players with the absolute cleanest mechanics have achieved.. like MVP and IdrA. The difference is, in SC2, the smartest players win, like Nestea and Thorzain, rather than those with the best pure mechanical skill - and that's how it should be. I couldnt agree more with this post, thats exactly how i feel about the matter. Although BW 'oldschool' players fail to realize that or actually choose not to. +1000
Um... no at the above.
People who reckon there is more strategy in SC2 need to watch some Brood War.
JulyZerg currently holds the record for apm at 818. He now plays SC2 at a very high level, so what does that say?
When Flash completely dominated Jaedong in two consecutive grand finals, it had nothing to do with mechanics.
Flash is also known for his gamesense and strategy, rather than his mechanics.
Stork, Savior, Movie, these players are all great players that hovered around 230-ish apm. Stork is still recognised as one of the 4 pillars of BW and made it to the last OSL grand final.
Hell, even the term Bonjwa was really established during Savior's era. He never won through mechanics, he probably was the lowest in the top 50 (mechanics wise) while retaining #1 spot and dominating everyone.
How many times has Bisu completely changed his PvZ strategy? If it was just mechanics he wouldn't have to do that.
The beauty is in the combination of both, he uses the fact that he has awesome multitasking to create strategies no other protoss can use. e.g The Bisu build, +1 speedlot - +1 corsair, and whatever his new build was that he used to completely own Jaedong.
This is why when Stork creates a PvZ strategy, its completely different and caters to a more micro oriented timing attack style, rather than a harass based macro style.e.g 2 base Mass high temp- reaver - goon.
Snow has a completely different PvZ again, using his amazing reaver micro to control the game. e.g 2 Base Reavers - +1 Speedlots.
None of these players are likely to play the same style of PvZ because they specialise in completely different areas.
In SC2 as soon as someone comes up with a strategy everybody can use it. 5 rax reaper, everybody used it, Collosus Stalker deathball, everybody uses it, Muta/Ling/Bane, everybody uses it. So much for strategy and depth hey.
|
On May 22 2011 06:23 StatorFlux wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2011 05:49 gn0m wrote:On May 22 2011 04:40 Noelani wrote:On May 22 2011 03:05 gn0m wrote:
You are pretty clueless if you believe that there is no strategy in BW. The game is 13 years old and is still evolving in terms of strategy. There is not less strategy in BW than in SC2, its just more mechanics on top of it. In BW, players with the combination of great mechanics and a brilliant mind win. Its unbelievable that so many SC2 players think that less mechanics automatically means more strategy. It just means less mechanics, period. It isn't that broodwar requires less strategy in an absolute sense. That would be impossible to prove either way. It's that in a practical sense, broodwar requires less strategy because of the mechanical demands. A high ranked professional player can do literally anything and win just on mechanics against a random high ranking ladder player for example. A great demonstration of this is TL attack featuring Sea where he goofs off and nukes some of the better foreign players. In SC2 a professional player can very easily lose to randoms on the ladder, partly because the game is young and not properly balanced yet and aggression in general is too powerful, but also partly because their superior mechanics can't set them apart as they could in broodwar. Yes, Korean progamers can easily destroy random iCCup players due to the sheer difference in mechanics and I dont see a problem with that. But as you may know, competitive BW is not about progamers vs. amateurs. On a higher level everyone have good mechanics (although, there are differences there as well) and strategy is an essential part of the game. You display a very poor understanding of BW by saying “Instead of the top players being able to win purely on mechanics, you actually have to use *gasp* strategy, to win an RTS game.” The argument that SC2 requires a “totally different skillset” is therefore false. The point of the OP is that BW players have the necessary tools to do well in SC2; dedication, mechanics, good decision-making and a strategic thinking. The fact that terrible players that made the switch are performing well proofs that much of the skill can be translated between the games. But how do you explain the fact that, internally and statistically, for switching brood war-players there seems to be almost no correlation between being a better BW-player and being a better SC2-player? There seems to me that certain BW-players are favoured by the switch more than other, and that is a small indication that the skill set is different, at least in the sense that relatively different skills matter more than other. (Saying that BW has no strategy seems unfair, but maybe the emphasize of strategy in SC2 has led to that different players shine. This is only speculation.)
Attribute it to the game, the amount of time since release, or the quality of the players, but currently the depth of strategy in broodwar is a million times that of starcraft 2. Just watch vods of current bw games and you will be stunned I'm sure.
Nice article, totally agree but I don't know whether I want other BW pros to move over or not.
|
Well I appreciate the guys that switched over, even if you've been clear enough as to why they're not on par with some of the Brood War mammoths. If no one would take the risks of switching it would be impossible to create the infrastructure for SC2 to shine, teams to get heavier sponsors and tournaments to go mainstream. Then Bisu, Jaedong and Flash can come over.
|
they wont come over because they have a passion for BW and call the game too easy (iirc, Flash said the game was too easy)
|
On May 22 2011 20:55 shaman6ix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2011 22:41 Noelani wrote:
It was (actually still is) a major problem in broodwar that the game is so mechanically demanding. It has a terrible UI and unit AI. Just because SC2 has fixed these problems doesn't make it an "easier" game. It simply requires a different skillset. Instead of the top players being able to win purely on mechanics, you actually have to use *gasp* strategy, to win an RTS game.
It's not that it requires no practice or that it's easy to get to the top at all. You still have to have extremely good mechanics to compete in the first place, which right now really only a couple players with the absolute cleanest mechanics have achieved.. like MVP and IdrA. The difference is, in SC2, the smartest players win, like Nestea and Thorzain, rather than those with the best pure mechanical skill - and that's how it should be. I couldnt agree more with this post, thats exactly how i feel about the matter. Although BW 'oldschool' players fail to realize that or actually choose not to. +1000
BW is not only mechanically demanding, it is skill demanding, 1000x more than in sc2 in any moment. And yet, in BW, u have to be smart to win, just like in SC2. Have u seen flash play? The mind games he does in the finals?? How he completely dismentle Stork in the OSL finals making it one of the shortest finals u would have seen? How he win mind games against Jaedong in finals?? U would understand Y somebody like flash deserves to be the most dominant player in the world. Rather than watching MC 4gate and 6gate every game and saying that he deserves to be the most dominant player. U call that smart play?? PUI !!!! BW requires GOOD mechanics+GOOD micro¯o management+Smart to win. In SC2, u do not need good mechanics because most pros already have similar mechanics level, as it is 1000x easier than bw to catch up on mechanics. GOOD micro? YES. GOOD macro? NO, 10000x easier than bw on macro. Smart play? YES. So Y does it require a different skillset?? U should say it requires an EASIER SKILLSET..... But yet, i cant deny that players like Nestea and Marineking plays smartly and deserves what they are now. watching Nestea's spine rush and Marineking's builds are just magnificent.....
|
On May 22 2011 21:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2011 20:55 shaman6ix wrote:On May 21 2011 22:41 Noelani wrote:
It was (actually still is) a major problem in broodwar that the game is so mechanically demanding. It has a terrible UI and unit AI. Just because SC2 has fixed these problems doesn't make it an "easier" game. It simply requires a different skillset. Instead of the top players being able to win purely on mechanics, you actually have to use *gasp* strategy, to win an RTS game.
It's not that it requires no practice or that it's easy to get to the top at all. You still have to have extremely good mechanics to compete in the first place, which right now really only a couple players with the absolute cleanest mechanics have achieved.. like MVP and IdrA. The difference is, in SC2, the smartest players win, like Nestea and Thorzain, rather than those with the best pure mechanical skill - and that's how it should be. I couldnt agree more with this post, thats exactly how i feel about the matter. Although BW 'oldschool' players fail to realize that or actually choose not to. +1000 Um... no at the above. People who reckon there is more strategy in SC2 need to watch some Brood War. JulyZerg currently holds the record for apm at 818. He now plays SC2 at a very high level, so what does that say? When Flash completely dominated Jaedong in two consecutive grand finals, it had nothing to do with mechanics. Flash is also known for his gamesense and strategy, rather than his mechanics. Stork, Savior, Movie, these players are all great players that hovered around 230-ish apm. Stork is still recognised as one of the 4 pillars of BW and made it to the last OSL grand final. Hell, even the term Bonjwa was really established during Savior's era. He never won through mechanics, he probably was the lowest in the top 50 (mechanics wise) while retaining #1 spot and dominating everyone. How many times has Bisu completely changed his PvZ strategy? If it was just mechanics he wouldn't have to do that. The beauty is in the combination of both, he uses the fact that he has awesome multitasking to create strategies no other protoss can use. e.g The Bisu build, +1 speedlot - +1 corsair, and whatever his new build was that he used to completely own Jaedong. This is why when Stork creates a PvZ strategy, its completely different and caters to a more micro oriented timing attack style, rather than a harass based macro style.e.g 2 base Mass high temp- reaver - goon. Snow has a completely different PvZ again, using his amazing reaver micro to control the game. e.g 2 Base Reavers - +1 Speedlots. None of these players are likely to play the same style of PvZ because they specialise in completely different areas. In SC2 as soon as someone comes up with a strategy everybody can use it. 5 rax reaper, everybody used it, Collosus Stalker deathball, everybody uses it, Muta/Ling/Bane, everybody uses it. So much for strategy and depth hey.
I totally agree with ur post....
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1187 Posts
On May 21 2011 22:41 Noelani wrote:
It was (actually still is) a major problem in broodwar that the game is so mechanically demanding. It has a terrible UI and unit AI. Just because SC2 has fixed these problems doesn't make it an "easier" game. It simply requires a different skillset. Instead of the top players being able to win purely on mechanics, you actually have to use *gasp* strategy, to win an RTS game.
It's not that it requires no practice or that it's easy to get to the top at all. You still have to have extremely good mechanics to compete in the first place, which right now really only a couple players with the absolute cleanest mechanics have achieved.. like MVP and IdrA. The difference is, in SC2, the smartest players win, like Nestea and Thorzain, rather than those with the best pure mechanical skill - and that's how it should be.
I fail to see how thats a major problem or a problem at all. People with inferior mechanics take games off S classers all the time. Mechanics just give the superior player leeway to come back from unfavourable build order matchups or for them to execute strategies other people simply cannot. If anything that makes it strategically more interesting because your never sure quite sure if your cookie cutter cheese strat will fail simply because they do something sublime that you didn't think any player was capable of pulling off.
It would be like saying tennis, basketball or various codes of football would be better if they were less physically intensive, since some people can run faster, hit or kick harder or are just taller than the vast majority of the population, and it therefore takes away from the strategic depth of the game.
Sometimes some strategies are simply not available to some players because they don't have the mechanical competence to execute them, all it does is make it more awesome to watch when the top players do it.
On May 22 2011 20:55 shaman6ix wrote:
I couldnt agree more with this post, thats exactly how i feel about the matter. Although BW 'oldschool' players fail to realize that or actually choose not to.
+1000
We certainly realize that sc2 is just mechanically less demanding, we indeed choose not to see this as a problem, because we accept that mechanical differences are not only a part of the game, but serve to add depth to a game. I'm sorry if you don't like it that some of the strategies you see bw pro's use are 'purely mechanics' because you or I simply can't execute them, but us 'oldschool' players are perfectly happy to see people win using all strategic tools available to them, even mechanics.
More on topic, I don't know why so many people are up in a tizzy, the article was not about why sc2 was easier, or BW players being just more talented.
The fact of the matter is Intrigue is basically just pointing out:
There are lots of transferable and/or generic RTS skills common to bw and sc2 players.
Current bw players as a general rule, even the B teamers, work a hell of alot harder than current sc2 players.
While I disagree the current S classers will necessarily be the top dogs should there be a mass switch, surely some players will be 'lost in translation' so to speak. I would find it difficult to believe that former BW pros in general would not dominate SC2 if current SC2 didn't end up adopting the BW style practice schedules. While it might not be exactly the same S-classers and A-classers at the top after any theoretical switch, it would also not surprise me if they largely were, I think the key being what makes the S-class players S-class is some talent, but ultimately still a good generic RTS skillset and mindset, and lots of hard work and dedication.
Simply by being a massive population of players with largely the right generic talents and more importantly work MUCH harder than people in the current SC2 scene, is it really so far fetched that hard work = better results?
|
You can discuss this item all you want. Until these players switch to SC2 to prove your point, this remains invalid and speculation.
|
No it's not speculation because the mediocre to bad few who have switch dominate the scene....
|
That doesn't imply guaranteed succes for them, as the game aged almost a year and thus the used variables do not apply. And by the way, you can say whatever you want, this remains speculation. Sorry to burst that bubble.
|
To me, although this article was entertaining to read, i don't see the elephant you seem to be pointing at to be that big. You are creating facts from statistics. what you believe to be the greatest sc1 players will be and are still just that, sc1 players. I have watched the pro scene for years and played BW for years as well but i don't think you are labelling what you see properly.
This article is directly taking into account that sc1 players are better at sc2 than the current pool of participants which we now see. You are basing this solely on the fact that failed sc1 players have moved to sc2 and are having success (nada and Co. excluded). Although you might be correct and that flash and jaedong are better at sc2, you cannot assume so. Flash and jaedong are exceptional players to say the least, but sc2 is a different game, we must not forget that. Also, we must not forget that just because someone failed at one thing, does not mean he cannot excel at something else.
Take micheal jordan for example, what if for the first few years of his career he would have played.. umm i dunno, baseball? and sucked at it(which he did), then moved on to basketball and then became one if not the greatest player in the NBA? would we have then compaired Barry bonds, mark mguire or babe ruth to him? saying "well if those players come over to basketball, they will crush michael jordan" No, because the history we have seen unfold has told us otherwise.
This article seems to make sc1 players seem so godlike that they are unbeatable in any other game/aspect of e-sports which is just to me, flat out wrong. flash jaedong fantasy and leta are exceptionnal players, but so are MVP MC and Nestea. Also, Sc2, is very young, so your elephant is more like a mouse to me.
|
On May 23 2011 21:12 ShadeR wrote:
No it's not speculation because the mediocre to bad few who have switch dominate the scene....
But they don't it seems! Some of the "mediocre" [BW-players] gets worse than the "bad" [BW-players] and some get better.
So my point is two things.
1. Say that there were 200 BW-players better than MC in Brood War, this does not imply (what I have seen of the statistics yet) that ALL those 200 will be better than MC in Starcraft 2. Some will, I imagine, but if it's true and who it will be we can only speculate about.
2. I wouldn't say dominate. In the top-20 in Korean TLPD is 13 BW-players, is this domination? We could look at TSL3 and conclude that ex-WC3 players dominate also.
But I would argue that it is previous pro-gaming experience which makes for game-switchers to rise to the top.
So we can expect the ratio 'Switchers' to 'Native SC2-players' to decrease as SC2 gets older..
|
JulyZerg currently holds the record for apm at 818. He now plays SC2 at a very high level, so what does that say?
No, I hold the record for apm at 936, as if that supposedly means something. It's really unbelievable to me that people think apm has anything to do with mechanics. Axslav's mechanics are much better than vibe's...
|
On May 25 2011 01:12 Noelani wrote:Show nested quote +JulyZerg currently holds the record for apm at 818. He now plays SC2 at a very high level, so what does that say? No, I hold the record for apm at 936, as if that supposedly means something. It's really unbelievable to me that people think apm has anything to do with mechanics. Axslav's mechanics are much better than vibe's...
July once peaked at 818 APM in a pro live BW match, so unless you've had 936 in a pro game sorry to say but he has you beat. To say that "It's unbelievable to me that people think apm has anything to do with mechanics" is a huge stretch. I would say that maybe apm is not the most important aspect of either BW or SC2 but it still remains a very important aspect of the game. Try using 7-10 apm vs an evenly matched opponent using 300-350 apm. You will more than likely lose overwhelming, especially if you don't try to rush or "cheese". Apm is important to the game just as the other aspects. If you can't preform all the useful actions that are available in the game at the current time then it would help you to have a higher apm.
Sorry but I just honestly don't understand how someone could say apm has nothing to do with mechanics? If you want to say apm is the least important aspect of the game thats fine but at least try to provide evidence to your claim.
|
Isn't SC2 APM "toned down"? As in someone who was a regulat 300 APM in BW will now only max out at 200 in SC2.
Anyway, back to the original BW pros vs SC2 pros question. I'd say just give SC2 a year or so to settle, it's hard for anyone to actually be pro without the infrastructure that BW has and without the stability in balance tweaking (that SC1 lacked for years as well).
I would say the current SC2 pros, despite not showing nearly the same hardened practice (why would they? They salaries aren't in the same range as for BW yet) and mechanics still show great decision making and tournament endurance.
|
July once peaked at 818 APM in a pro live BW match, so unless you've had 936 in a pro game sorry to say but he has you beat.
I don't know what being a pro or in a pro game has to do with APM. Bad players can click just as fast as good players.
If you want to say apm is the least important aspect of the game thats fine but at least try to provide evidence to your claim.
I already did. Axslav who is usually around 85-100apm has a much cleaner build and better control than Vibe who has over 350 typically.
APM has almost no correlation with your ability to efficiently accomplish the many tasks needed in a game. A lot of people have a mistaken belief that APM equates to your ability to multi-task. No one denies the need to play quickly and accomplish many things in a short period of time, however the displayed "APM" number has almost no bearing on a players ability to do this.
|
As a BW player, I don't think that it's reasonable to ask SC2 players to rise up to the same level as Jaedong and Flash.
The difference between Jaedong/Flash and some other programers often appears like the difference between a 10 year old girl and a professional boxer. Whether it's watching Flash comes back from a 2 base vs 6base against Kwanro or watching Jaedong decimate progamers with only mutalisks you always fall into complete awe watching these players.
That type of thing just simply can't exist in Starcraft 2, where absurdly quick thinking, macromanagement, and even micromanagement is not focused upon as much. I don't like to refer to SC2 as a coinflip game, but 1 year into the game that's what it is. However, to be fair Brood War was a joke 1 year in.
Even if Jaedong/Flash switched to SC2, sure they would win every league they attend (or at least 1 of them would since there's no room for 2 people in first place) but there is no way in hell that they could do the same things they did in Brood War, winning by making their opponent seem like toddlers.
|
On May 25 2011 11:14 Noelani wrote:Show nested quote +July once peaked at 818 APM in a pro live BW match, so unless you've had 936 in a pro game sorry to say but he has you beat. I don't know what being a pro or in a pro game has to do with APM. Bad players can click just as fast as good players. Show nested quote +If you want to say apm is the least important aspect of the game thats fine but at least try to provide evidence to your claim. I already did. Axslav who is usually around 85-100apm has a much cleaner build and better control than Vibe who has over 350 typically. APM has almost no correlation with your ability to efficiently accomplish the many tasks needed in a game. A lot of people have a mistaken belief that APM equates to your ability to multi-task. No one denies the need to play quickly and accomplish many things in a short period of time, however the displayed "APM" number has almost no bearing on a players ability to do this.
Ah but you see, his APM was contributing directly to the execution of his strategy.
He was muta microing on opposite sides of the map with two groups at the same time.
|
On May 25 2011 11:14 Noelani wrote:Show nested quote +July once peaked at 818 APM in a pro live BW match, so unless you've had 936 in a pro game sorry to say but he has you beat. I don't know what being a pro or in a pro game has to do with APM. Bad players can click just as fast as good players. Show nested quote +If you want to say apm is the least important aspect of the game thats fine but at least try to provide evidence to your claim. I already did. Axslav who is usually around 85-100apm has a much cleaner build and better control than Vibe who has over 350 typically. APM has almost no correlation with your ability to efficiently accomplish the many tasks needed in a game. A lot of people have a mistaken belief that APM equates to your ability to multi-task. No one denies the need to play quickly and accomplish many things in a short period of time, however the displayed "APM" number has almost no bearing on a players ability to do this.
Yes, you can make 1000 APM just by spamming like a retard, but JulyZerg probably hit around 600+ APM while maintaining the high EAPM customary of progamers, probably around at least 400 EAPM or so during his spikes. And high EAPM corresponds very well to your ability to simultaneously micro and macro.
And there are a fair number of low APM Brood War players out there, but not many. They are highly exceptional because they have something stupid like 95% effective percentage. I don't even know how you can compare July's 600 APM micro spikes to your 900 APM spamming. The very idea of making such a comparison is blatantly retarded.
|
You guys must REALLY REALLY miss BW
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
