|
On March 29 2011 04:21 Bagonad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 03:19 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already. I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Its useless to stress about things that may or may not yet come true, even worse so when you have no control over it. You say SC2 is dumbed down, well mechanics are way easier, thats for sure, but game itself is not ''dumber'' in any way. Yes BW is terrific and I too follow it, but Sc2 has awesome international scene, nothing bw will ever have mostly due to the mechanics. Also basing it on at the moment low level pro (lets be real) bw switchover player losing in a single game to I dont know how much practiced player (probably more than Nada)... Try watching the games closely, there's many times where the players would've loved to do a little drop while microing their army, or splitting their army more and attack from multiple angles and keep up the micro, but are hindered by their mechanics. Even a lowly player like me can find many mistakes or wasted oppourtunities in the top players games, which tells me that we are very, very far from a "skill ceiling"
I dont think you have read my post closely. I`m not stating what you are trying disaprove.
|
Just finished watching the day 1 matches. Team fnatic doing it for the world all-stars team. Some great games in there.
I'm excited for tomorrow's games and then the bracket stage!
|
On March 29 2011 04:29 Sneakyz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 04:13 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:51 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:44 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:19 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already. I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Its useless to stress about things that may or may not yet come true, even worse so when you have no control over it. You say SC2 is dumbed down, well mechanics are way easier, thats for sure, but game itself is not ''dumber'' in any way. Yes BW is terrific and I too follow it, but Sc2 has awesome international scene, nothing bw will ever have mostly due to the mechanics. Also basing it on at the moment low level pro (lets be real) bw switchover player losing in a single game to I dont know how much practiced player (probably more than Nada)... The game is dumbed down. the strategies aren't. The mechanics are the only real significant change from BW to SC2, and the'yre what sepereted the pros from the semi pros. now that it's so much easier i dont see whats going to seperate them. I think SC2 could have had the scene it has with more difficult mechanics as well. Blizzard having WoW in its back just gave the company so much more publicity that i think the players would come regardless o fgame difficulty On March 29 2011 03:22 Scribble wrote:
Wow, the BW trolls are out in force today. My favorite part about all the "SC2 takes less skill" nonsense is that nobody can ever seem to point out how, and nobody can seem to explain that somehow people have gotten better since release...even though the same bs argument was being made during beta.
BW will continue to thrive for a while still. There's no need to feel so threatened that you have to leveraging pathetic insults against its main competition. I am not a troll, and BW is harder than SC2. that's a simple fact. so BW takes more skill. If you honestly think im a troll reread what i wrote. if you really need it spelled out for you heres why broodwar need more skill -macro, no MBS -spells, no smartcast -overkill, you needed better unit control -controle group sizes fun or not it was harder. And im not actually sure players got that much better, Blizzard jsut kept patching the game and modling it into the more macro heavy game it is now. Congratulations, you pointed out differences. A human being is only capable of so many tasks at a time. In BW, you correctly pointed out a number of important mechanics that players have to focus on, skill-sets which aren't necessary in SC2. So here's a thought, doesn't that just leave room for other skill-sets to develop? What I'm getting at, is let's just say the "skill ceiling," the maximum amount of tasks anyone is capable of handling is 400 actions per minute. In BW, you hit your skill ceiling managing these mechanics. In SC2, people will hit it managing other mechanics UNLESS there is no way, mechanically, to play better. Is that honestly what you're arguing? I'd certainly accept that the skill ceiling for mechanical play is lower in SC2...if you're only talking about base management, but micro? There is absolutely no limit to how much room there is for unit control to improve IN EITHER GAME, but there is a limit to how much a person can physically do. If players are using their hands less for the mechanics you listed, they're just going to find other ways to improve. There's simply no reason why this cannot be the case, and THAT is a fact. BW does inherently take more skill to be a top level player; it requires DIFFERENT skills. wrong. im sorry, but this arguement keeps getting made while it holds not truth. if the opportunity to micro in BW and SC2 is the same then on a micro level the skill is the same(actually not true bcause of smartcase but ill neglect that) id say they're pretty close though if the strategical aspect in Bw and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. id say this si true as well if the opportunity for mechanics in BW and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. this is not true however so lets sum up: skill opportunitys in sc2: micro, strategy skill opportunitys in BW: micro strategy, mechanics so if a BW player can reach the micro and strategy of a SC2 player(trust me, they can  ) while maintaining insane mechanics wouldn't you argue that takes more skill than without those mechanics? more possibility to improve is always better Wooooosh. If a player could do an infinite amount at a time, then yes, BW would in fact take more skill. However, that is physically impossible. Again, think of it like an 'APM Budget.' That budget is finite, but the amount you can spend it on is not. BW players 'spend' their APM on the mechanics we have already established. SC2 players will eventually be spending it less on BW mechanics, and more on micro, even more than BW. BW players have great micro in addition to their base management mechanics, no argument here, but they still sacrifice micro for base management because that is what is most important. If they didn't have to devote so much of their multi-tasking to it, however, they would simply be able to micro even better and that is the skillset they would develop. That is how SC2 will play out. BW emphasizes base management mechanics and micro to a lesser extent, SC2 will be the opposite; base management is and will continue to be less demanding, and players will turn the micro up to 11. Both games will have similar ATTAINABLE skill ceilings, but they'll require different skill sets. That's my whole fucking point. but then why do BW pros have equal or better micro, equal strategical depth while maintaining higher macro? you scenario is a hypothetical, mine is something which actually happens. bisu is living proof of what you are saying isnt humanly possible in fact is humanly possible So what you're saying is that even though TT1 used a build that's basically designed to play against banshee openings, he should lose because Nada presses his buttons faster, and hardly even practice since he attends Uni. It all makes sense to me.
if thats what you get from my posts then so be it.
what im saying is that the skill levels have come very close together. and even though NaDa and TT1 were so far apart in BW now they are equals. or TT1 better.
obviouslys other influences such as time devoted to the game, the age of the game(mentioned before if you would read my posts instead of assuming im bashing SC2 which im not) etc will factor in. still its hard to believe that such a skill difference simply disapeared
this is why i fear for the continued improvement of SC2 games. which would be sad.
the way the game works and what i've seen in possible to do in BW just doesnt add up with the arguement that the SC2 skillset will jsut shift imo. maybe it will maybe it wont.
|
On March 29 2011 03:52 xaneda wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 03:46 ggrrg wrote:On March 29 2011 03:25 Miefer wrote:
I played some bw before but not that much like sc2 now. so i am not a expert in bw.
i am really curious what make people think that sc2 need less mechanics than bw?
i mean in bw you didnt have larva inject, creep spread , mules, crono and so on. also the resource managment is quite the same. army control too. - Try constantly producing units from 25-30 gateways when being able to select only one at a time (same applies to hatcheries and barracks/factories) 25-30 gateways and barracks? This isn't fastest map possible. Try not to talk out of your ass.
There have been pro games with such ridiculous amounts of gateways, but you're right that's certainly not the standard case. However, in a macro PvT you will see 10-15 gateways, which is already difficult enough no produce out off. Barracks are difficult to handle even in smaller numbers (say 8), since units are produces very fast (marines - 24 seconds), which makes it quite tricky to keep up a constant stream of units. When you are pushing in the meantime, it becomes incredibly mechanically demanding to produce units. Now consider that in sc2 you can do all of this with a single hotkey...
|
When they won in TSL3 you tried to blame it on lag, now you are trying to blame it on the skill ceiling being so low, how come you didn't mention that when MVP, Nestea, and Fruitdealer lost?Because you are making excuses.
|
Team Fnatic > Team Korea?
In day 1, at least. Still no IMs or Liquids yet 
|
|
|
I think the reason of the close skill gap we are seeing in sc2 is because of the amount of practice. Time and time again we have heard many pro (Nada, Idra, etc) said they don't practice as much as BW. Meanwhile, a lot of top foreign players are practising more compare to BW times.
IMHO, some of these pros failed in BW because they no longer want to practice hard like everyone else. And if they think the same way in SC2, they are doom to fail again.
|
France12904 Posts
On March 29 2011 04:38 mustache wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:29 Sneakyz wrote:On March 29 2011 04:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 04:13 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:51 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:44 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:19 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:
[quote]
Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:
[quote]
Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already.
I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Its useless to stress about things that may or may not yet come true, even worse so when you have no control over it. You say SC2 is dumbed down, well mechanics are way easier, thats for sure, but game itself is not ''dumber'' in any way. Yes BW is terrific and I too follow it, but Sc2 has awesome international scene, nothing bw will ever have mostly due to the mechanics. Also basing it on at the moment low level pro (lets be real) bw switchover player losing in a single game to I dont know how much practiced player (probably more than Nada)... The game is dumbed down. the strategies aren't. The mechanics are the only real significant change from BW to SC2, and the'yre what sepereted the pros from the semi pros. now that it's so much easier i dont see whats going to seperate them. I think SC2 could have had the scene it has with more difficult mechanics as well. Blizzard having WoW in its back just gave the company so much more publicity that i think the players would come regardless o fgame difficulty On March 29 2011 03:22 Scribble wrote:
Wow, the BW trolls are out in force today. My favorite part about all the "SC2 takes less skill" nonsense is that nobody can ever seem to point out how, and nobody can seem to explain that somehow people have gotten better since release...even though the same bs argument was being made during beta.
BW will continue to thrive for a while still. There's no need to feel so threatened that you have to leveraging pathetic insults against its main competition. I am not a troll, and BW is harder than SC2. that's a simple fact. so BW takes more skill. If you honestly think im a troll reread what i wrote. if you really need it spelled out for you heres why broodwar need more skill -macro, no MBS -spells, no smartcast -overkill, you needed better unit control -controle group sizes fun or not it was harder. And im not actually sure players got that much better, Blizzard jsut kept patching the game and modling it into the more macro heavy game it is now. Congratulations, you pointed out differences. A human being is only capable of so many tasks at a time. In BW, you correctly pointed out a number of important mechanics that players have to focus on, skill-sets which aren't necessary in SC2. So here's a thought, doesn't that just leave room for other skill-sets to develop? What I'm getting at, is let's just say the "skill ceiling," the maximum amount of tasks anyone is capable of handling is 400 actions per minute. In BW, you hit your skill ceiling managing these mechanics. In SC2, people will hit it managing other mechanics UNLESS there is no way, mechanically, to play better. Is that honestly what you're arguing? I'd certainly accept that the skill ceiling for mechanical play is lower in SC2...if you're only talking about base management, but micro? There is absolutely no limit to how much room there is for unit control to improve IN EITHER GAME, but there is a limit to how much a person can physically do. If players are using their hands less for the mechanics you listed, they're just going to find other ways to improve. There's simply no reason why this cannot be the case, and THAT is a fact. BW does inherently take more skill to be a top level player; it requires DIFFERENT skills. wrong. im sorry, but this arguement keeps getting made while it holds not truth. if the opportunity to micro in BW and SC2 is the same then on a micro level the skill is the same(actually not true bcause of smartcase but ill neglect that) id say they're pretty close though if the strategical aspect in Bw and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. id say this si true as well if the opportunity for mechanics in BW and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. this is not true however so lets sum up: skill opportunitys in sc2: micro, strategy skill opportunitys in BW: micro strategy, mechanics so if a BW player can reach the micro and strategy of a SC2 player(trust me, they can ) while maintaining insane mechanics wouldn't you argue that takes more skill than without those mechanics? more possibility to improve is always better Wooooosh. If a player could do an infinite amount at a time, then yes, BW would in fact take more skill. However, that is physically impossible. Again, think of it like an 'APM Budget.' That budget is finite, but the amount you can spend it on is not. BW players 'spend' their APM on the mechanics we have already established. SC2 players will eventually be spending it less on BW mechanics, and more on micro, even more than BW. BW players have great micro in addition to their base management mechanics, no argument here, but they still sacrifice micro for base management because that is what is most important. If they didn't have to devote so much of their multi-tasking to it, however, they would simply be able to micro even better and that is the skillset they would develop. That is how SC2 will play out. BW emphasizes base management mechanics and micro to a lesser extent, SC2 will be the opposite; base management is and will continue to be less demanding, and players will turn the micro up to 11. Both games will have similar ATTAINABLE skill ceilings, but they'll require different skill sets. That's my whole fucking point. but then why do BW pros have equal or better micro, equal strategical depth while maintaining higher macro? you scenario is a hypothetical, mine is something which actually happens. bisu is living proof of what you are saying isnt humanly possible in fact is humanly possible So what you're saying is that even though TT1 used a build that's basically designed to play against banshee openings, he should lose because Nada presses his buttons faster, and hardly even practice since he attends Uni. It all makes sense to me. if thats what you get from my posts then so be it. what im saying is that the skill levels have come very close together. and even though NaDa and TT1 were so far apart in BW now they are equals. or TT1 better. obviouslys other influences such as time devoted to the game, the age of the game(mentioned before if you would read my posts instead of assuming im bashing SC2 which im not) etc will factor in. still its hard to believe that such a skill difference simply disapeared this is why i fear for the continued improvement of SC2 games. which would be sad. the way the game works and what i've seen in possible to do in BW just doesnt add up with the arguement that the SC2 skillset will jsut shift imo. maybe it will maybe it wont. u forget that tt1 is protoss.
(and bo1 but...)
|
On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already. I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart.
Did you watch the TT1 vs. Nada game? Nada lost a banshee due to bad unit control and was supply blocked pretty early on in the game. It's pretty difficult to complain about not needing crazy mechanics to win in SC2 when the player who you're saying has the insane mechanics is making mechanical errors.
|
On March 29 2011 04:38 mustache wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:29 Sneakyz wrote:On March 29 2011 04:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 04:13 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:51 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:44 Scribble wrote:On March 29 2011 03:25 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 03:19 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:
[quote]
Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:
[quote]
Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already.
I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Its useless to stress about things that may or may not yet come true, even worse so when you have no control over it. You say SC2 is dumbed down, well mechanics are way easier, thats for sure, but game itself is not ''dumber'' in any way. Yes BW is terrific and I too follow it, but Sc2 has awesome international scene, nothing bw will ever have mostly due to the mechanics. Also basing it on at the moment low level pro (lets be real) bw switchover player losing in a single game to I dont know how much practiced player (probably more than Nada)... The game is dumbed down. the strategies aren't. The mechanics are the only real significant change from BW to SC2, and the'yre what sepereted the pros from the semi pros. now that it's so much easier i dont see whats going to seperate them. I think SC2 could have had the scene it has with more difficult mechanics as well. Blizzard having WoW in its back just gave the company so much more publicity that i think the players would come regardless o fgame difficulty On March 29 2011 03:22 Scribble wrote:
Wow, the BW trolls are out in force today. My favorite part about all the "SC2 takes less skill" nonsense is that nobody can ever seem to point out how, and nobody can seem to explain that somehow people have gotten better since release...even though the same bs argument was being made during beta.
BW will continue to thrive for a while still. There's no need to feel so threatened that you have to leveraging pathetic insults against its main competition. I am not a troll, and BW is harder than SC2. that's a simple fact. so BW takes more skill. If you honestly think im a troll reread what i wrote. if you really need it spelled out for you heres why broodwar need more skill -macro, no MBS -spells, no smartcast -overkill, you needed better unit control -controle group sizes fun or not it was harder. And im not actually sure players got that much better, Blizzard jsut kept patching the game and modling it into the more macro heavy game it is now. Congratulations, you pointed out differences. A human being is only capable of so many tasks at a time. In BW, you correctly pointed out a number of important mechanics that players have to focus on, skill-sets which aren't necessary in SC2. So here's a thought, doesn't that just leave room for other skill-sets to develop? What I'm getting at, is let's just say the "skill ceiling," the maximum amount of tasks anyone is capable of handling is 400 actions per minute. In BW, you hit your skill ceiling managing these mechanics. In SC2, people will hit it managing other mechanics UNLESS there is no way, mechanically, to play better. Is that honestly what you're arguing? I'd certainly accept that the skill ceiling for mechanical play is lower in SC2...if you're only talking about base management, but micro? There is absolutely no limit to how much room there is for unit control to improve IN EITHER GAME, but there is a limit to how much a person can physically do. If players are using their hands less for the mechanics you listed, they're just going to find other ways to improve. There's simply no reason why this cannot be the case, and THAT is a fact. BW does inherently take more skill to be a top level player; it requires DIFFERENT skills. wrong. im sorry, but this arguement keeps getting made while it holds not truth. if the opportunity to micro in BW and SC2 is the same then on a micro level the skill is the same(actually not true bcause of smartcase but ill neglect that) id say they're pretty close though if the strategical aspect in Bw and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. id say this si true as well if the opportunity for mechanics in BW and SC2 is the same then the skill level is the same. this is not true however so lets sum up: skill opportunitys in sc2: micro, strategy skill opportunitys in BW: micro strategy, mechanics so if a BW player can reach the micro and strategy of a SC2 player(trust me, they can ) while maintaining insane mechanics wouldn't you argue that takes more skill than without those mechanics? more possibility to improve is always better Wooooosh. If a player could do an infinite amount at a time, then yes, BW would in fact take more skill. However, that is physically impossible. Again, think of it like an 'APM Budget.' That budget is finite, but the amount you can spend it on is not. BW players 'spend' their APM on the mechanics we have already established. SC2 players will eventually be spending it less on BW mechanics, and more on micro, even more than BW. BW players have great micro in addition to their base management mechanics, no argument here, but they still sacrifice micro for base management because that is what is most important. If they didn't have to devote so much of their multi-tasking to it, however, they would simply be able to micro even better and that is the skillset they would develop. That is how SC2 will play out. BW emphasizes base management mechanics and micro to a lesser extent, SC2 will be the opposite; base management is and will continue to be less demanding, and players will turn the micro up to 11. Both games will have similar ATTAINABLE skill ceilings, but they'll require different skill sets. That's my whole fucking point. but then why do BW pros have equal or better micro, equal strategical depth while maintaining higher macro? you scenario is a hypothetical, mine is something which actually happens. bisu is living proof of what you are saying isnt humanly possible in fact is humanly possible So what you're saying is that even though TT1 used a build that's basically designed to play against banshee openings, he should lose because Nada presses his buttons faster, and hardly even practice since he attends Uni. It all makes sense to me. if thats what you get from my posts then so be it. what im saying is that the skill levels have come very close together. and even though NaDa and TT1 were so far apart in BW now they are equals. or TT1 better. obviouslys other influences such as time devoted to the game, the age of the game(mentioned before if you would read my posts instead of assuming im bashing SC2 which im not) etc will factor in. still its hard to believe that such a skill difference simply disapeared this is why i fear for the continued improvement of SC2 games. which would be sad. the way the game works and what i've seen in possible to do in BW just doesnt add up with the arguement that the SC2 skillset will jsut shift imo. maybe it will maybe it wont.
The only real skill difference was mechanics so, why would it be hard at all to believe that?
Also, noone is even close to perfect mechanics even in SC2 yet.
|
On March 29 2011 04:48 Ruseter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already. I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Did you watch the TT1 vs. Nada game? Nada lost a banshee due to bad unit control and was supply blocked pretty early on in the game. It's pretty difficult to complain about not needing crazy mechanics to win in SC2 when the player who you're saying has the insane mechanics is making mechanical errors.
NaDa isn't playing anymore. He plays from time to time.
He studies right now on University.
soo... NaDa BW =/= NaDa SC2
|
SC2 is more random. Nobody can get Flash's win ratio in SC2(80wins 20 loses 80%,80%,80%) because there is no physical skill part in SC2.
you don't need apm that much. you don't need multitasking that much. so anyone who practice hard can be a top tier player.
|
Russian Federation1849 Posts
On March 29 2011 04:53 namedplayer wrote:
SC2 is more random. Nobody can get Flash's win ratio in SC2(80wins 20 loses 80%,80%,80%) because there is no physical skill part in SC2.
you don't need apm that much. you don't need multitasking that much. so anyone who practice hard can be a top tier player.
Is that a bad thing?
|
I though that today the only person to actually try was San, anypro just did fail rush any protoss today can do and Nada just didn't give a shit I think, he got supply blocked, fail banshee harass and staying on 1 base. That's nothing like the usual NaDa we see in gsl. Korean players @ the bench, especially MPV were all laughing all the time, it seemed like they weren't taking it seriously. It's fine though, because we had some excellent games today.
Looking forward to tomorow's round.
|
On March 29 2011 04:56 Hemula wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:53 namedplayer wrote:
SC2 is more random. Nobody can get Flash's win ratio in SC2(80wins 20 loses 80%,80%,80%) because there is no physical skill part in SC2.
you don't need apm that much. you don't need multitasking that much. so anyone who practice hard can be a top tier player. Is that a bad thing?
As an E-sport. Yes.
Without someone or some team dominating at some point. People will lose interests over time.
|
On March 29 2011 04:53 namedplayer wrote:
SC2 is more random. Nobody can get Flash's win ratio in SC2(80wins 20 loses 80%,80%,80%) because there is no physical skill part in SC2.
you don't need apm that much. you don't need multitasking that much. so anyone who practice hard can be a top tier player.
If you are using what is considered "skill" in reference to BW, then yes, Blizzard has streamlined a lot of features that the old UI required the user to micromanage and fight in order to obtain the desired action on screen. In so far as the game requiring less APM or skill overall, that is not determinable at this point since the metagame does not yet require players to go that far just yet. If you can win a game with a deathball because players are still trying to make sure all chrono's, mules, injects etc. are on time, then thats what is going to happen.
When the basic mechanics of SC2 are normalized, then you can expect to see the unique ceiling of what high level SC2 play is get pushed higher.
|
On March 29 2011 04:59 myIRE wrote:
I though that today the only person to actually try was San, anypro just did fail rush any protoss today can do and Nada just didn't give a shit I think, he got supply blocked, fail banshee harass and staying on 1 base. That's nothing like the usual NaDa we see in gsl. Korean players @ the bench, especially MPV were all laughing all the time, it seemed like they weren't taking it seriously. It's fine though, because we had some excellent games today.
Looking forward to tomorow's round.
Well, the koreans might be hiding their builds for the real deal. Regardless this will be nice for worldteams confidence.
|
On March 29 2011 04:51 DirtYLOu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 04:48 Ruseter wrote:On March 29 2011 03:01 mustache wrote:On March 29 2011 02:52 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Thats a silly statement dood. It takes alot of skill to compete. TT1 obviously has skill. Whoever said that TT1 was way better or Nada was way worse? if a BW pro can scout rush a supposed foreigner pro and win. THAT shows you how much better the koreans pros were in BW. 3 OSL and 3 MSL wins are telling me that nada is the better player. In BW that is. In SC2 its all about who does what strat instead of about needing insane mechanics to pull those strats off. Which is sad because it makes things very "flavour of the week" TT1 is a great player, but if you honestly think SC2 compares to BW in terms of skill difference between top players then you are just lying to yourself or have no clue about BW. On March 29 2011 02:54 Jakalo wrote:On March 29 2011 02:49 mustache wrote:
sad how dumbed down SC2 is compared to BW. it's not like TT1 is all of a sudden way better or nada way worse. Oh man, this is a new game, its sad you cant get over it already. I play SC2. I have tons of fun playing and watching SC2. What dissapoints me and what im scared of is that SC2's skill limit will be reached way too fast. I'm not mooning over BW, just sad that SC2 is missing things which made BW great. a 3x OSl and 3x MSL winning losing to some foreigner is proof to me that the skill levels at the top are too close, and it's not really possible to set yourself apart. Did you watch the TT1 vs. Nada game? Nada lost a banshee due to bad unit control and was supply blocked pretty early on in the game. It's pretty difficult to complain about not needing crazy mechanics to win in SC2 when the player who you're saying has the insane mechanics is making mechanical errors. NaDa isn't playing anymore. He plays from time to time. He studies right now on University. soo... NaDa BW =/= NaDa SC2
No one was comparing Nada in SC2 to Nada in BW. The argument being made is that in SC2 there isn't room for much skill difference between top players because the mechanics needed to play at that level require less apm/focus. The example used was that Nada must have great mechanics because of his BW experience and that the only thing that dictated who won was build order or strat differences. All I'm saying is that Nada made a few mechanical errors in that game. His unit control and macro wasn't perfect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
