EPT[SC2B] Under the Microscope - Page 3
| Forum Index > News |
|
Hautamaki
Canada1311 Posts
| ||
|
DarkMatter_
Canada1774 Posts
| ||
|
Freezard
Sweden1025 Posts
I just played a crazy 2v2 in BW where I ended up sniping high templars with 3/3 cloaked wraiths, one shotting overlords and scanning for observers to finally attack with a group of battlecruisers vs a bunch of goons and cannons that were protecting the last remaining expansion. I don't know but I've never got a feeling like that in SC2, just controlling wraiths TvZ is more fun than doing any micro in SC2. | ||
|
Darpa
Canada4413 Posts
There are still tons of timing pushes in SC2, there are still imbalances, the imbalances come from unit comp (as you mentioned) rather than spells. I fail to see how this is less dynamic. Different, absolutely, but I dont see how unit imbalances make for less interesting play then spell imbalances, frankly I would much rather see a good army comp and decent micro crush an enemy army rather than watching 3 Hi templar storm 30 hydras into submission, or watching a tank line killed by 10 zerglings and dark swarm (maybe others feel differently?). I am just hesitant to make a claim like that when you nor I have any idea where SC2 strategy and play is going to take us. While I agree to some extent that there is less gameplay potential I for one am excited that games will be more based on tactics and unit play rather than who has more APM and can manage his control groups better. Dont get me wrong, I am and always will be a huge fan of BroodWar, The game has changed, thats for certain but I think its a little premature to count out Sc2.  | ||
|
Freezard
Sweden1025 Posts
| ||
|
teamfuckquit
1 Post
| ||
|
soliddew
United States28 Posts
| ||
|
jackofclubs81
United States196 Posts
On July 11 2010 11:22 Sheth wrote: Good read. Very intereseting points about why SC1 was great, I hope we can find enough little tricks in SC2 that will make it interesting. Also if not theres always the expansion to hope for. Thanks for taking the time to write this! I doubt they will nerf the game engine in the expansion though... But it never hurts to hope ! | ||
|
ElectricGrandpa
Canada8 Posts
Everyone is comparing the *BETA* of StarCraft 2 to the *EXPANSION* of the original StarCraft, which had bajillions of patches until it got to the state it's in now. That seems just a little bit premature, doesn't it? Chillllll. | ||
|
SolidusSnake
United States11 Posts
On July 11 2010 13:03 Lord_of_Chaos wrote: I would say that, for example, force fields are extremely interesting. It's just on the current maps they play out wrong. There are big differences between current sc2 maps and the professional bw maps. I think that on a map with a wider center, allowing for more army movement and flanking, force fields will be a very interesting spell that will increase the dynamics and interactions. Overall I fear that sc2 is currently being balanced on inferiour maps.... Very true. I was thinking maybe we gotta wait for bigger maps like in proleague maps for BW n see how it plays out. Ive been watchin alot of korean proleague, n the maps are alot alot bigger. We just gotta wait for them to recreate the maps for sc2 | ||
|
DeckOneBell
United States526 Posts
But a possible side effect (or even intended effect) of the missing "over-powered" spells of BW in SC2 means that it's a lot less possible for one misclick to lose a game. Maybe that destroys some tension as a spectator sport, who knows. | ||
|
myopia
United States2928 Posts
 | ||
|
N(o)sarcasm
11 Posts
--- Starcraft and its predecessor are 12 years old. --- Starcraft 2 and its three expansions are 0 days old. It is still in its beta phase. To expect a legacy like Starcraft to be followed without flaw or fault is simply being naive. Starcraft took years to captivate the lives of millions upon millions of players and viewers. Starcraft 2 seems to have to do this before it ever hits the shelf. I understand the sentiments of needing to macro a marine around to make the most of its usage on the field. The desire to dodge that lurker shot, split the armies to avoid the mass tank damage that could potentially end the game if you so much as a half a second off. Give the baby of this Legacy time to grow into what we all hope it will be. To expect a child to have the same aspects as its parent before its even been given time to grow is, I'll use the word selfish. People are being selfish with the seemingly unwavering desire for starcraft 2 to simply be a polished up starcraft 1 in every aspect, good or bad. It seems that perhaps while what made starcraft one great, also poses a sense of.. arrogance to the newer generation of children that haven't had more than a decade to perfect what seems to easy when we watch. Let Starcraft 2 have a chance to apply that 'awe' factor that the original had. I'm sure there will always be "I wish this was like that" moments in games, but to isolate those who want to take part in the creation of a game that is, in my opinion, a legacy by which most rts compare themselves to, seems very selfish. In closing, I understand most, if not all of what I am typing has probably been posted or said a hundred million times over on various threads, forums, and conversations with friends. Though I would hope that some will gain a little insight if I have covered something that hasn't been said before. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8173 Posts
it doesnt matter how old the game is. there is a competition between BW and SC2 right now, a competition to take up our free time. right now BW is out and costs 20$. SC2 is out and will cost 60$ in 3 weeks. basically you are all saying "yea BW is better but in a few years SC2 might be as good! just give it time!" is it unfair to compare the 2? absolutely not. Sure it has a lesser developed metagame but that doesnt mean i have to play this inferior game for 2 years until MAYBE it gets better. basically BW is superior to SC2 right now in every gameplay regard except accessibility, which is where the masses of new SC2 users probably find most appealing (there is also probably the lot of people who like playing a game where most strategies are widely undiscovered, although that doesnt really apply to this comparison). will SC2 improve and have greater dynamics over time? maybe. the expansions will add new units for sure, but even if they rival BW in terms of completely awesome game-changing units that are possibly the most exciting in the game, i have doubts that it will ever match the perfection of BW. a fun distraction for a time? sure, but it will just be like any other game i play for a week or 2 and then go back to my real game, BW. | ||
|
D1sturbance
United States30 Posts
There were a few games where it was non-stop action, back dooring, and just general aggression that were wonderful to watch and obliviously took skill. This is all not to say that the skill ceiling isn't lower in SC2, you don't have to fight the game to play it, your not fighting each unit to go up a ramp, so that lowers the skill ceiling. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
BioSC
United States636 Posts
| ||
|
cHaNg-sTa
United States1058 Posts
On July 11 2010 11:59 ApacheChief wrote: I don't think this is true at all. StarCraft 2 probably has MORE interactions between the races, with early game spells like forcefield, EMP and fungal growth. I don't understand... Have you played/watched BW a decent amount? I'm guessing you haven't. Spells were a lot more devastating in BW. They were ESSENTIAL to some tactics. Getting storm out for the mass hydra bust, getting dark swarm to save yourself from the M&M/tank push, getting irradiate out to stop the powerful muta sniping, getting spider mines to deal with the mass speedlots, and many more. These were all absolutely critical and powerful to stopping the opponent's powerful push/strategy. But the beauty about it is that even though it's a great and powerful spell to repel the opponent's strategy, the opponent can still make use of his units with superior micro. Storm dodging, moving all units out of dark swarm quickly, scourging science vessels (which even the Terran can counter with even better micro), zealot bombing, etc. SC2 introduces too many elements that weaken the effect of these awesome spells because of how easy smart casting is. This is an extremely poor decision in terms of game dynamics because now everyone can storm with similar efficiency. On the other hand, a greater player in BW can make less templars AND storm far more effectively and faster than a player who is slower and not as micro-prepped. This is key, a BW player with a couple of templars against zerg is scary. But it's not scary at all in SC2 until they have a ton of templars. You EARN your "terrible terrible damage" in BW, the game doesn't just give it to you. Things in SC2 like FF, fungal growth, marauders' concussive shells, etc, don't allow the opponent to overcome these "counters" with greater micro. It's just not possible. If I get FF'd, the only thing I can do is just.. let my trapped units attack. There's really nothing else you can do. Fungal growth? Well, you're just trapped until it wears off. And I'm sure everyone has experienced trying to run away from marauders with the trailing units have zero hope of living. They don't give the option of "hey, great micro can get me out of this pinch!" And that's what makes BW the great spectator sport it is today. I think SC2 is fun to watch, but just for how long? Who knows. I still get goosebumps watching BW games. I hope SC2 can still do the same, but that might be asking for too much. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
SC2 should have taken what was so captivating in BW and made it even better. IMO SC2 just seems to be riding on the success of BW, and hoping that any change will still lead to a good game. | ||
| ||
