EPTOn January 15 2009 18:42 Aesop wrote:
Great effort at explaining.
Great effort at explaining.
I agree, Warcraft 3 is not really my type of game but the explanations were top-notch.
Warcraft 3 Micro - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
I agree, Warcraft 3 is not really my type of game but the explanations were top-notch. | ||
|
inReacH
Sweden1612 Posts
On January 15 2009 18:34 thedeadhaji wrote: in 3s "who is winning" has more factors than life bar, including SA meter condition and which characters they are using. Life bar being inside "1 hit kill" range is also a factor (ie getting chained into SA means death) etc Just because a matchup isn't completely balanced doesn't mean someone is winning off the get go... noone loses a good matchup and has his friends come up to him and say.. "Aw too bad you were winning right after the character selection screen" And saying you have to follow the SA bar too as opposed to just the health bar doesn't really negate my point. Anyways I have nothing against SF I'm just saying it's easy to follow who is winning but that doesn't make it a great spectator sport. | ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
thanks for the expalanations, originally i watched the video without reading it and i didn't understand like 2 or 3 situations. For example the blade master inside of the big turtle lol, that is genius hehe. | ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
On January 15 2009 19:41 inReacH wrote: Thank you, by the way is your name a reference to Aesop Rock? If so I grew up listening to him and only him for like 6 years. I think it should be a reference to the original Greek guy | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On January 15 2009 19:45 inReacH wrote: Just because a matchup isn't completely balanced doesn't mean someone is winning off the get go... noone loses a good matchup and has his friends come up to him and say.. "Aw too bad you were winning right after the character selection screen" And saying you have to follow the SA bar too as opposed to just the health bar doesn't really negate my point. Anyways I have nothing against SF I'm just saying it's easy to follow who is winning but that doesn't make it a great spectator sport. What if two players are 100% equal? Then the one with the advantage due to unbalance will likely win. An advantage is an advantage, doesn't matter who wins.Your argument is lacking. | ||
Aesop
Hungary11268 Posts
On January 15 2009 19:41 inReacH wrote: Thank you, by the way is your name a reference to Aesop Rock? If so I grew up listening to him and only him for like 6 years. Never heard of him . The reference is rather antique. | ||
|
inReacH
Sweden1612 Posts
On January 15 2009 20:09 Zoler wrote: What if two players are 100% equal? Then the one with the advantage due to unbalance will likely win. An advantage is an advantage, doesn't matter who wins.Your argument is lacking. Having an advantage is not literally the same as winning despite the fact that you can infer that a player is winning by pointing out that he has an advantage in a critical aspect of the game. To be literally winning players must have taken action in gameplay. This is because there are many X factors besides just character selection such as skill or fatigue etc. Two players cannot be exactly equal in every relevant category. Anyways not really the point of my post I was just trying to discredit some idiot who made a shit post that just had one link and posted as though it meant something. | ||
|
Raithed
China7078 Posts
| ||
|
nataziel
Australia1455 Posts
Starcraft is not only much clearer as to being able to see things, but it's also easier to understand, the only things that aren't really clear in starcraft at first glance are dark swarm, and maybe Dweb. Stasis is easy to understand because of the visual effect, I suppose EMP is a bit difficult work out straight up too. Ensnare is ok because of the visual effect and clear difference in speed of the units. | ||
|
hazz
United Kingdom570 Posts
| ||
|
nataziel
Australia1455 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
| ||
|
Jaeden
Romania1489 Posts
| ||
|
GogoKodo
Canada1785 Posts
Could've done without some of the super zooming jitterbug stuff in a few of the beginning scenes though. | ||
|
CFDragon
United States304 Posts
. However, the games just weren't as fun or exciting for me. Most of the time I was playing, I was just thinking about how I'd rather be doing a Zergling run-by, or some Muta micro. And the severe lack of macro really is what killed it for me. I live off of 0sh9sh8sz7sd6sd.I do play and enjoy the custom maps in WC3 though. I like the editors power and you can do many interesting and unique things that the SC editor just can't handle. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32040 Posts
| ||
|
KissBlade
United States5718 Posts
| ||
|
inReacH
Sweden1612 Posts
On January 16 2009 04:06 KissBlade wrote: I liked some of the micro clips but highlights of stuff like evasion or random reach on spells is the reason why I hate War3 so much. Sometimes you just get RNG'd and have no way to win. Gawd it's never that severe at all.. SC has random elements too like AI targeting and critter blocks People who cry about stuff like that are looking for something to cry about. Sure it happens but it's not exactly a frequent game decider. I do agree it should be minimalized but it's not a reason to hate a game. | ||
|
Equinox_kr
United States7395 Posts
| ||
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
I remember watching the micro in Weryeery's post before and thinking "holy crap that's insane" but didn't appreciate the impact it had on the game until I read about it. It was some insane micro, but nothing died, so to someone like me that doesn't know much about the game, it seems like an empty move that doesn't accomplish anything | ||
| ||
