On November 30 2011 11:20 AndAgain wrote: To play devil's advocate regarding unit pathing and army ball effect: a lot of what it does in BW is just prolong the inevitable loss.
I was watching Flash against Jaehoon yesterday, where Jaehoon was just running around with dragoons and zealots against Flash's mech army. It lasted a lot longer than it was interesting because it takes a while for spread out armies to reach a conclusion.
So in that sense, you could argue that SC2 is superior.
the reason why Jaehoon was moving around was that he was always waiting for a better opportunity to attack. Flash push was basically perfect until he reached Jaehoon base, and then it became really complicated for Jaehoon. Jaehoon loss was clearly not unevitable, despite Flash getting a very good economic advantage. A more talented pushbreaker might have been able to pressure Flash into a mistake too.
On November 30 2011 11:22 ladyumbra wrote: Also this seems like a good a thread as any to ask this in and please forgive me I've only been following BW since slightly before the last OSL finals so my knowledge is still pretty weak. Have there ever been games in BW where the entire map was mined out? Have there ever been games like at dreamhack ( mana vs goody or tod vs happy ( and yes I know this happens in the gsl and other tournaments as well)) where players split the map and then won't engage each other until it pretty much happens by accident? Most of the BW games I have watched have little lulls in the excitement but I've never spent 20 minutes staring at a game wondering when someone was going to at least move a unit.
I love both games and I greatly enjoy watching starcraft 2 most of the time but I could use less games where both players just outright avoid their opponent for as long as possible. If this happens in BW as well i'll just accept it is one of those strats i don;t like but is inevitable.
Yeah it has happened. There have been quite a few stalemate situation in pro-bw, and even a few draws. I think the best example was Shine[Name] vs Canata. Awful game.
At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
It's prettier. Brood War battles, from what I have seen (which was some random "epic moments" recommended by someone), are kind of slow and low-key. The casters were going insane, but to me it seemed like a complete lull, and when the action finally happened, it was anti-climatic. It was hard for me to understand why certain things were going on, or why it was taking so long for anything to happen (or seemed that way). Very small movements seemed to impress the casters a lot, but I had no idea why. It was inaccessible.
ZvZ is crazy, but even those are rarely one big 1-A engagement and then game. It's usually a series of big engagements, with drops and positioning playing a huge roll during those battles. It's over quick, sure, but that means you lose big or win big. Which is usually more exciting.
On November 30 2011 11:32 jinorazi wrote: to those that say sc2 battles are better must be a huge fan of transformers movie franchise, and everything michael bay.
Not really. I'm not opposed to the idea of action-packed, visually stunning, thin-on-the-story, movies; but I rarely watch them ever. I prefer more cerebral or dramatic films.
With Starcraft though? Yeah. I like pretty explosions.
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
It's prettier. Brood War battles, from what I have seen (which was some random "epic moments" recommended by someone), are kind of slow and low-key. The casters were going insane, but to me it seemed like a complete lull, and when the action finally happened, it was anti-climatic. It was hard for me to understand why certain things were going on, or why it was taking so long for anything to happen (or seemed that way). Very small movements seemed to impress the casters a lot, but I had no idea why. It was inaccessible.
ZvZ is crazy, but even those are rarely one big 1-A engagement and then game. It's usually a series of big engagements, with drops and positioning playing a huge roll during those battles. It's over quick, sure, but that means you lose big or win big. Which is usually more exciting.
Don't worry about being "unpopular". You have an opinion, it's justifiable, that's fine. But I do think if you want to really get a sense of the other side it might be worth it to watch more BW than "epic moments" videos.
You talk about those "small moments", those are part of what the game great. If you truly understand what is happening there you get a greater appreciation for the game. Like let's say you see a group of marines and medics kill 4 lurkers. On the face of it, it seems regular. But when you truly understand how much skill those kinds of plays take (marine micro against lurkers is VERY hard) it gives you a greater appreciation for the game.
On November 30 2011 10:55 Kharnage wrote: I would much rather watch a game of strategy and tactical control over the intense micromangement of the macro mechanics in BW.
I would rather see players lose or win based off sieging or unsieging tanks at the right time or doing a drops or having the drops denied over he didn't tell his probes to mine.
Huh? BW has intense mechanics PLUS insane strategy and tactical control. Watch Flash play and you'll understand the true meaning of "strategy and tactical control".
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
It's prettier. Brood War battles, from what I have seen (which was some random "epic moments" recommended by someone), are kind of slow and low-key. The casters were going insane, but to me it seemed like a complete lull, and when the action finally happened, it was anti-climatic. It was hard for me to understand why certain things were going on, or why it was taking so long for anything to happen (or seemed that way). Very small movements seemed to impress the casters a lot, but I had no idea why. It was inaccessible.
ZvZ is crazy, but even those are rarely one big 1-A engagement and then game. It's usually a series of big engagements, with drops and positioning playing a huge roll during those battles. It's over quick, sure, but that means you lose big or win big. Which is usually more exciting.
This also applies to a person who watches SC2 for the first time and hasn't played SC2.
Since you haven't played BW that much, or at least you haven't watched it enough to know those things, then some of the excitement is lost on you. But the way I see it, the big BW battles are easy to understand. Many lings vs many marines = many blood.
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
It's prettier. Brood War battles, from what I have seen (which was some random "epic moments" recommended by someone), are kind of slow and low-key. The casters were going insane, but to me it seemed like a complete lull, and when the action finally happened, it was anti-climatic. It was hard for me to understand why certain things were going on, or why it was taking so long for anything to happen (or seemed that way). Very small movements seemed to impress the casters a lot, but I had no idea why. It was inaccessible.
ZvZ is crazy, but even those are rarely one big 1-A engagement and then game. It's usually a series of big engagements, with drops and positioning playing a huge roll during those battles. It's over quick, sure, but that means you lose big or win big. Which is usually more exciting.
You realize that you were only allowed 12 units per key group, regardles of size of the units, right?
The "1-A" battles you are talking about are more like 1-a-2-a-3-a+ with fast boxing, while maintaining perfect macro, which also required you to be in your base, clicking each individual building. Maybe your problem is that you just never played the game, and as such, can not comprehend the level of skill it requires.
I realize that in BW you have a control group limit. I was speaking about SC2 in the ZvZ 1-A battles comment.
I played very little BW when I was younger, so that is definitely a big reason why I prefer the latter to the former. I recognize the immense amount of skill the one takes, but I am not convinced that the skill-set of the one is much further beyond where the other will soon be.
On November 30 2011 11:44 aviator116 wrote: honestly, i think SC2 is better than bw, even with all the nostalgia of playing for over a decade T__T
In my opinion bw is the better spectator game than sc2 , just because it requires much more mechanical complexity to pull off the strategy that you are looking on screen, not every person can do what jaedong do for example going fast hive tech in to ultralisk and guardian at the same time without lurkers ? insane ? It's jaedong man , I don't get any enjoyment from sc2 games at all , not a single bit , compared to watching a single game on broodwar , take example Jaedong vs Mind from yesterday's match.
On November 30 2011 00:37 The KY wrote: Watching Fin play and watching MVP play over the last two days, I'd say maybe people are hyping him up a little too much. MVP's play still impresses me much more
Mvp is also a former BW pro! That just further proves the point if he's the only one you can think of ... OMG ELEPHANTS!!!
A huge portion of the practice that BW pros have put in over time applies directly to SC2. They have been working much harder at the game for much longer and are therefore ahead of the curve compared to those who aren't Korean BW pros. Mechanics come with practice, even speed is improved with dedicated effort.
The notion of being "better" at RTS games is largely an irrational claim born of fanboyism. It is, I believe, an expression of understanding (often called "game sense") that is not transferrable from game to game. Timings, useful cheeses, hiding locations, drop paths, and all the other game elements that a player must master to improve quality of competitive play are game-, matchup-, and map-dependent and change monthly (if not quicker).
It does not take some sort of magical ability to get this understanding, it's useful and dedicated practice that enables understanding. That practice-generated understanding, plus personal creativity, separate players of equal mechanics, not a history of BW competition.
It is appropriate to be amazed by Flash and Jaedong, and to predict their success at whatever game they choose to play. However, it is vital to understand that the success is and will be born of work ethic, not talent.
The thing is that anyone with that work ethic and a significant interest in RTS games was probably playing BW professionally in 2010. There's a few exceptions, like Huk (played SC2 beta instead) and Leenock (too young to be pro, still a top amateur) but for the most part very few people who weren't willing and able to put 10 hours a day into BW won't do it for SC2 either.
It's not that BW magically makes you a good RTS player, it's just that those who were the most dedicated to RTS before SC2's release played BW. For the most part, you can expect them to be the most dedicated in SC2 as well.
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
Criticising something you don't understand just comes off as ignorant. If you're gonna throw your opinion around at least make an attempt to watch/understand BW (CJ vs ACE is on today, check out the LR + Stream).
You really have to understand what is actually going on when you watch the game. It's actually much faster than you think because of the U.I.
There is nothing slow about those engagements.
To the guy about jaehoon. As the other guy mentioned, he was trying to wait for the right moment to engage. His units were on hold position and he kept pulling them back. That game is a really bad example considering Jaehoon showed very poor control and he kept making 20 zealots and a ridiculous amount of goons. Poor unit composition like that will kill you. I could tell Hoon was getting flustered. He really didn't know what to do; he got completely overwhelmed by Flash's bulldozer.
jalster,
Yes the work ethic these players is one of their greatest assets when it comes to the game. Their practice schedule is absolutely ridiculous. Players like Flash, Stork, Bisu and Jaedong work their asses off everyday. There's a very good reason why they continue to get results when so many new kids enter the fray. Hard work.
On November 30 2011 11:47 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: I realize that in BW you have a control group limit. I was speaking about SC2 in the ZvZ 1-A battles comment.
I played very little BW when I was younger, so that is definitely a big reason why I prefer the latter to the former. I recognize the immense amount of skill the one takes, but I am not convinced that the skill-set of the one is much further beyond where the other will soon be.
The skill-sets won't approach each other because the game design for Broodwar naturally makes it a tougher game. The unlimited unit selection for 1 control group, easier macro mechanics, smart-casting etc mean that the skill-set required to be at the top level in SC2 won't be near what it takes to be good in Broodwar. There's a reason why IdrA switched from BW to SC2. It was because that was where the money was, but also because he was never going to be able to attain the skill-set to compete with the best (or even the mid-level progamers for that matter). I'm a huge IdrA fan in SC2, but that's the stark truth.
On November 30 2011 10:55 Kharnage wrote: I would much rather watch a game of strategy and tactical control over the intense micromangement of the macro mechanics in BW.
I would rather see players lose or win based off sieging or unsieging tanks at the right time or doing a drops or having the drops denied over he didn't tell his probes to mine.
bw has all of that you mentioned: strategy, tactical control along with intense micro and macro.
they removed worker rally and put in other mechanics to balance it (mule, chrono, larva, creep) unit production in bw pretty much the same as warp-ins. (look somewhere else, click click click click click click)
dont make it seem like bw is some automobile from early 1900's because it isnt. there is no issue with micro/macro in bw, sc2 is just easier when it comes to interface, not that bw is worse.
It is not worse! It is even superior in the way it still paves the way to everything E-Sport is aspiring to be.
The point is that BW IS an old automobile. It has this incredible charm, all those fancy glitches that bring back all the nostalgia of the good ol' times but ultimatelly it is obsolete. It has so many game design, ergonomical and technical issues (come on, Dragoon micro...) that it is not QA-compliant to today's standards anymore.
To go on with the car analogy:
As of today any F1 car has assisted direction, electronic gearboxes, etc. Those things are just ridiculous freaking combat jets on wheels. Pitstops are like "Automated-worker micro fiestas" with 8-10 minions rushing to freakin deconstruct and reconstruct the whole car anew in litterally seconds.
Does this make the pilot a lazy slouchy bastard? And why has F1 grown into this format? --> To allow the pilots to focus on fucking RACING FASTER than the other guy. And on that only.
The F1 pilot do not have to micro manage his own car glitches in the fear that it just goes out of control and smashes him dead against the wall at the next turn like the old racer did.
Does it make todays F1 pilots lesser pilots than the older guys that risked their necks at every second? I dont think so.
Tbh, nowadays I even think that F1 guys have grown to become better pilots because they are able to drive safer, way faster while pulling way more finer racing manoeuvers then before = WIN for the sport aspect. (Unless you enjoy watching guys getting burned alive or smashing their skulls all over the place ;-))
SC2 hasn't grown up to this maturity yet. But I want to believe that the direction it is going is the right one.
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
It's prettier. Brood War battles, from what I have seen (which was some random "epic moments" recommended by someone), are kind of slow and low-key. The casters were going insane, but to me it seemed like a complete lull, and when the action finally happened, it was anti-climatic. It was hard for me to understand why certain things were going on, or why it was taking so long for anything to happen (or seemed that way). Very small movements seemed to impress the casters a lot, but I had no idea why. It was inaccessible.
ZvZ is crazy, but even those are rarely one big 1-A engagement and then game. It's usually a series of big engagements, with drops and positioning playing a huge roll during those battles. It's over quick, sure, but that means you lose big or win big. Which is usually more exciting.
Watching a game that you don't play and don't understand is uninteresting? Gee, what a surprise.
My first few times watching BW, I had no clue what was going on. One guy has an army, other guy has an army, they fight, things die, yawn. I fell asleep halfway through a PL match once. Then I figured it might do me some good to, idk, actually learn about the game. I did my research, watched more games, and when things began to make sense, they began to get interesting. It's not inaccessible. You just didn't make any effort at all. Like the other guy said, someone who's never watched SC2 would look at it similarly with confusion and apathy as well.
Also, the guy probably recommended to you really lame moments. "Epic moments" in BW aren't any less obvious or flashy imo. An entire control group of dragoons melting into blue goo from a well-placed mine, a reaver scarab exploding into 10 probes, zealots being dropped onto into the fray and mine dragging/blowing up tank lines, storms annihilating masses of hydras and lurkers. How are those slow or low key?
On November 30 2011 09:09 Klogon wrote: That said, I think a harder SC2 that required more mechanics to master would be a far superior game than it is now. We don't need to make it as hard as BW, but I do think Blizzard missed the perfect compromise by drifting too far to the easy side.
I would have liked a harder game too, but nowadays people are just lazy and don't like to play complicated games. And producing a much more user friendly game will make more profit to blizzard, I don't think they have any intention to try to integrate hard mechanics that would make the difference between a bad and a good player.
About the 'lazy' comment... Seriously, ordering SCV where to mine each time one pops up is:
1- prehistorical game mechanics 2- plain NOT fun to do 3- doesn't bring anything to strategies 4- doesn't bring anything to spectating
it's just AUTOMATED WORK.
yet this shit (and tons of other ones of this king) IS what separates players skill levels in BW. And I am happy that this type of 'non-lazy' shit is no more in SC2 a "variable" into becoming a good player. This is a game, not some kind of penitenciary camp.
At least every single Larva inject/ MULE drop or Chronoboost holds a long-term strategic decision.
I disagree on this. Seeing idle workers is a good indication that the player's mechanics is slipping. Same with misrallied drones.
Not using chrono boost or queen energy is the same indicator, and it still happens despite the game supposedly being too easy. If it's so easy, why do 400apm players still not use all their chronoboost? Obviously there is still room for mechanical improvement from top players, even with the easier macro.
The real reason they don't is that there is too little incentive to do it, their apm is better spent somewhere else. In term of spectating, it's also less visible. Plus having a hard game to play brings on strategic depth in that you have to choose what you need to focus on. You need a good balance between that and being stupidly hard. Plus larva inject is a terrible mechanic that has made zerg macro 10 times more boring. It's nothing more than a gimmick that has brought zerg closer to the other races by making larva a much less important ressource.
For SC2 players to really understand how BW players feel about some of the new features like auto-mine, imagine if Starcraft 3 came out and there was an "auto-inject" option for Queens. Wouldn't that just be... "too easy" to do? Sure, it removes needless clicking, but just right-clicking "inject" to make it an auto-cast skill midway through the game just seems wrong. SC3 fanboys would be saying SC2 had too much mindless clicking for stupid things like Queen injects, when you could be using that time to "strategize" instead.
Okay, so I'm not say that the all the SC2 UI features that made the game easier are bad or whatever, but hopefully this example helps you understand how BW fans feel.
To be honest, the Queen Inject ability is actually a pretty boring and repetitive "automated work" that one must do as a zerg simply to make macro more difficult. You could actually compare it to telling drones to go mine. The choice between injecting larvae, spreading creep, or saving for transfuse is not something zerg players lose sleep over. Larvae inject could be tweaked, but that would severely mess with the balance of the game.
Well to some extent sc2 adds new mechanics such as creep spread, larvae injects, etc to add more skill to the game. There is NO WAY that blizzard could make a game in this day and age without worker rallies, multiple building control groups, etc.
It's true. And this is where I have entertained the idea of "User Interface" upgrades at the command center / hatchery / nexus.
I think there could be compromise that would follow intuitively into the spirit of RTS. Essentially, each player is a General that is controlling and ordering their army around. But like in any military army or organization, communication and technology really helps the generals control their army. So why not introduce a new set of upgrades kind of like weapon-armor upgrades: Unit-Building selection upgrades.
Limit unit selection, buildings, etc to some number that will take you through the early/mid game, but be insufficient for the mid/late game. And then have a "UI Upgrade - Improved Communications" at Tier 2 where you can double (and the next step triple) your unit selection and building selection capacity. Hell, you could even go all fancy with this and make the unit selection maximum based on supply (You can only control 30 supply at a time, or something), which would make lings easier to group in huge groups, but harder to control 15+ mutas, etc.
This would allow casual players who float tons of money to upgrade that anyways and have an easier time in late game, but allow pros who do not need such upgrades to differentiate themselves by not having to waste resources on such an upgrade. Knowing that certain key timings require that you do not upgrade these 300/300 UI upgrades, or that certain pros moved 200 zerglings / 40 mutas across the map without them would certainly make games much more impressive, especially when they have the option to upgrade it for a price but chose not to and still won.
Genius!
Not only does it keep the casual player involved but can scale with difficulty. Allowing the upgrades to scale would allow newbs to progress at a pace rather than all at once. Besides, I doubt there is a pro out there who feels that unlimited selection is benefical to the spectacle of the game. People want spread out action, with stuff happening all over the map. This needs small groups where unlimited selection is of no benefit.
On November 30 2011 11:31 MasterBlasterCaster wrote: At the risk of being unpopular for holding this opinion:
Criticising something you don't understand just comes off as ignorant. If you're gonna throw your opinion around at least make an attempt to watch/understand BW (CJ vs ACE is on today, check out the LR + Stream).
What exactly did I criticize that isn't readily apparent with the shortest viewing of BW ever? I said that the graphics were very old and therefore not nearly as good as SC2. That isn't arguable, nor is it really a criticism, nor will it be changed by my watching more games. BW graphics are perfectly fine for their day, but be honest, if a new game came out with BW graphics, you would laugh your butt off.
I said that my impression of it was that it was slow and inaccessible. This is not a criticism of the game. The game is, I'm sure, wonderful and balanced, and obviously far more popular than SC2. My opinion on it is that it is not as interesting or fun to watch. I don't watch hockey, and I do watch football. It's not because hockey is bad, and football is good. It is that I find one interesting and the other boring. That doesn't mean that hockey or BW are boring, or stupid, or not every bit as cool and great and whatever as SC2 and football. It means I don't like it as much.
It will be very hard for me to get into BW, because the graphics thing is kind of a big deal to me.
EPT
