|
Well, they don't exactly suck (hey, I had to get your attention somehow) but they are so much weaker than what I was used to see in bw, maybe I'm being to hard on people that haven't spend a glimpse of the time bw progamers have playing the game but they make a lot of mistakes that I have to say aren't very "professional".
After watching a little less than 100 pro-replays (I've recently started playing the game), I've seen to many hidden expansions, scouting mistakes, micro mistakes, etc. While I can understand micro mistakes specially in a game where lag is much more of an issue the other two are imho unacceptable in high level play independently of what rts we're talking about.
so...I'me done whining
EDIT: I realize allowing hidden expensions is a scouting mistake, but what I meant as a scouting mistake is being surprised by your opponent's unit choice for exemple, stuff like that.
|
Hidden expansions also occur in SC. Consider the fact that scouting is much harder in war3 - a retarded game decision.
|
starcraft has been perfected for 10 fucking years
war3 has been around like 3 or 4?
think about how newbie the best starcraft players were in 1999
|
but SC had no replays ~_~
|
United States37500 Posts
I'm not sure what pro replays you're talking about, but if you watch Korean replays or WC3L replays, they are all pretty good for the most part. Scouting mistakes and micro mistakes, I'm pretty sure there are the same mistakes as in SC too. Hidden expansions are harder to check due to overall slower units.
|
On March 14 2005 00:02 NeoIllusions wrote:
I'm not sure what pro replays you're talking about, but if you watch Korean replays or WC3L replays, they are all pretty good for the most part. Scouting mistakes and micro mistakes, I'm pretty sure there are the same mistakes as in SC too. Hidden expansions are harder to check due to overall slower units.
most of the reps I saw are from wc3l, I also saw this recent race war and some random korean replays i could find. And even guys like Spirit_Moon, whose status right now must be like..god-like does stuff like not scout his opponent at all and be surprised by 8+ gargs with absolutly 0 anti-air, I mean, that's coming from the best player in the world. And as people have said before me (and as I said myself in the first post) I realize bw programers have spent a lot more time playing bw than this guys playing war3, the reason I made this thread was simply because it surprised me how (genericly) low the level is.
|
United States37500 Posts
Um, Moon goes archers at tier 1 90% of the time. I rarely see him get hunts, especially against NE vS UD, so to say 0 anti-air is kinda stretching it. And if you're talking about the Replays.Net IGE Race Wars, MooN went 3-1 against the UDs and took out 4K^FoV which is probably top 3 or maybe even the best UD at the moment. MooN was taken down by MYM]GoStop in a game where GoStop clearly outmicro'ed MooN.
MooN towered rushed FoV... NE tower rushing. You find me another replay of another NE player doing that to FoV and winning and I'll take back everything I just said.
|
if you're referring to when the gnoll wood game where moon went mass bears vs. gargs, you've completely missed the mark. bears counter the expo, and then venom orb on DH and the panda breath can handle the gargs nicely. nothing really dies because of rejuv + staff of tp. moon had it all worked out.
but besides that yeah I agree BW progamers are on a much godlier level. but don't blame the players, blame the game! i.e. the room of the game that allows for full capability of a gamer to be realized. if war3 allows a max skill/everything pool of "100" and it's "hard" to get to 80, while it's "very hard" to get to 90 and "extremely super duper hard" to get to 95, compare that with if sc's "pool" is "1000" and now it's "hard" to get to 800, "very hard" to get to 900 and "extremely super duper hard" to get to 950. if that's able to be followed at all, rofl. who knows maybe i'm just talking out of my ass, it's 3:30 am :[
|
United States37500 Posts
I didn't watch all the IGE replays so thanks Aether for covering for me. And sadly to say, most of the UD units (probably not including Dests) can be totally countered by NE/Tavern heroes. If you want to say that aspect of the game is imba/unfair/lame, I won't really argue with you on that part. But to say that MooN is subpar...? You really need to play more of the game and then come back and check MooN's replays. He rarely makes any mistakes.
|
United States37500 Posts
n/m, i completely misread Aether's edited section... haha
|
On March 14 2005 00:26 NeoIllusions wrote:
Um, Moon goes archers at tier 1 90% of the time. I rarely see him get hunts, especially against NE vS UD, so to say 0 anti-air is kinda stretching it. And if you're talking about the Replays.Net IGE Race Wars, MooN went 3-1 against the UDs and took out 4K^FoV which is probably top 3 or maybe even the best UD at the moment. MooN was taken down by MYM]GoStop in a game where GoStop clearly outmicro'ed MooN.
MooN towered rushed FoV... NE tower rushing. You find me another replay of another NE player doing that to FoV and winning and I'll take back everything I just said.
u completly missed the point, I'm not saying Moon isn't as good as people say he is, I'm saying his great, damn did u see him buying the dust before (whoever that orc guy was) in turtle rock to keep him from revealing his injured hunts? My point was not that Moon is overrated, simply that war3 programers have a much lower level than I expected before watching their reps.
PS: I'll look into the games again to make sure I'm not confusing replays and that it was indeed Moon in that replay, it was a lost temple game, either way, if it wasn't him it was some other NE programer involved in those series.
PPS: Moon also targeted his DH with his ap in the game vs FoV, not that that's a big mistake, it's just a missclick and the man is only human, it's just a "^^" note 
EDIT: it's against Susiria and he has like 3archers, but I guess it's kind of obvious he was caught unprepared, but still, don't put too much enfasis on this example, it wasn't my point to undervalue Moon.
|
United States37500 Posts
Haha, well... "WC3 progamers are at a lower level (compared to SC)", keep in mind that SC has been out longer and SC pros have refined micro/macro/multitasking skills to an art. Keep watching replays from WC3L and Korean VODs and you'll slowly appreciate what WC has to offer.
|
I LIKE that progamers dont look like they are in god mode. If they were any better I would slap myself for being so much worse than them.
|
wc3 gameplay is much more determined by spontaneous decisions. basically you run around the map (which is heavily influenced by creeping patterns) with your 1-2 control groups and execute micro in fights. that's more or less how far the strategical depth of wc3 reaches.
in bw there are way more strategical possibilites like e.g. map control, feints etc. and therefore you put a lot of thought in every of your next moves.
it's playing instinctively (background creeping patterns) with WC3 vs. playing strategically (background map control, perfect BOs etc ..) with SC.
of course both games need a good portion of either instinct and strategy but with wc3 the stress lays on the first and with sc on the latter.
spontaneous players make more mistakes. that's basically what i wanted to say -_-;;
|
I can see where you're coming from Kobayashi... I still get pissed off when I see a supposed professional make a simple yet costly mistake that ends up biting them in the ass and losing the game for them. Like attack-moving and not manually microing units. Or letting heroes/armies stand idle and not creeping or whatever. Or trying to counter dual-AoW mass hunts with solo beastiary-produced wyvern. Or foregoing macromanagement and letting gold bank up to 900 before deciding to make buildings/units.
Stupid mistakes like that
edit: forgot a word
|
On March 13 2005 23:05 Kobayashi wrote:
Well, they don't exactly suck (hey, I had to get your attention somehow) but they are so much weaker than what I was used to see in bw, maybe I'm being to hard on people that haven't spend a glimpse of the time bw progamers have playing the game but they make a lot of mistakes that I have to say aren't very "professional".
Remember MMI lately? Europe won because Zeus, Pusan and Legionnaire lost their games.
I sometimes don't like to scout myself: during fight you try not to lose any units and when you scout you have good chances to give free xp to get no information.
|
We all know this, I was watching reps from WCG 04 in W3 and its so slow and boring, they have over 1K and theyre not building anything omg.
|
Only post that made any sense about wc3 was from requiem^^ If ur not in the game and u just think hey bw is better then u won't get why these mistakes or misclicks happen.
|
I think WC3's problem is just the way the game is designed. It's a very slow and tedious game compared to SC and scouting really isn't something that the game itself encourages... When you scout in WC3 you either have to waste an early skill point better spent on combat skills from a valuable hero character, build and send off a useless unit that travels about as quick as a slug and more often than not end up giving your opponent's hero some free XP, or spend valuable resources researching something retarted like Huntress' owls... Granted, they're very useful if used right, but it's just very costly in the beginning of the game to do such things. I'd definitely say that early scouting is not exactly something encouraged by the game design of WC3 and because it lacks a method of scouting early for cheap, it often leads to situations such as the one described where a player may go minimal antiair only to be hit with a horde of air units. I'm sure the pro players will eventually start figuring out some more effective patterns of scouting, but it's just not that huge a part of the game at the moment.
When I play, I always use a skillpoint on my PoM's owl first thing... It's about the best scouting the game offers in my humble opinion. But yeah... I don't really like the game too much. It's just too slow for me. =T
Also as for the relative level of WC3 pros in comparison to SC pros, I will totally admit that there is a much bigger gap between an SC noob and SC pro than there is between a WC3 noob and a WC3 pro and there is good reason for this.
1. SC has been out for a great deal longer than WC3 so the micro aspects of the game along with most effective build orders and scouting patterns have pretty much been perfected whereas WC3's metagame is still pretty much evolving and growing.
2. WC3 is a much more difficult game to master and be consistently successful at than SC. I know I might get flamed for this, but I hate WC3 and I'm admitting this outright. The hero system in WC3 brings many new aspects to the game that aren't in SC as do the creeping system and the abundance of different spells. In SC, everyone is pretty much on equal ground. There are units, spells, and upgrades, but you don't have to worry about something like "Hero Level" and "Creeping". Your concern is on your opponent, not the various seals and tigers that roam the land. In WC3, creeping is a very big part of the early game and your creeping patterns will determine a LOT in terms of the flow of the rest of the game. Decisions such as "Do I pull out a couple more normal units? Or should I make another hero?" don't really appear in SC because no single unit in SC has the battle potential that a high level Hero has and at the same time sucks as much as a LVL1 Hero...
*Just a personal note on the Hero system, I think it's a failure because every LVL10 hero will have identical skills to every other LVL10 hero of the same type. They should've made it more like D2 where you were offered more skills than you could possibly learn... That would've introduced so much more in terms of hero-based strategy and micromanagement.
3. WC3 is much, much more luck-based than SC. This also testifies to the consistency of the game. The types of items you get, how the creep AI responds to you, etc. These things affect the flow of the game greatly. SC is a much more solid game in terms of overall strategy.
_______________________________________
Conclusion: WC3 is just a very different game from SC. They may both be RTS games, but WC3 is somewhat less of a solid strategy game and more of a decision making/micromanaging game. In SC, you pretty much know what you have and nothing is randomly given to you by the map. This is not true in WC3. WC3 is a much younger game that has more of a "well, I'll give you this, now what are you going to do with it?" feel because of the fact that your opponent and yourself aren't the only two elements to worry about.
|
I wouldn't say that makes WC3 harder to master at all. If you watch a fpvod of sc and wc3, you will get an idea of who is having a harder time playing.
But I also hate how in wc3 there are so many luck based things, especially considered you are punished for scouting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
