• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 18:52
CEST 00:52
KST 07:52
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202552RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams7Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 667 users

How to make SC2 feelMore like BW and less like WC3 - Page 2

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 Next All
cerebralz
Profile Joined August 2009
United States443 Posts
February 28 2010 20:38 GMT
#21
I tend to agree with the opinion that we all need to hold on and wait for the game to develop before we start making big assumptions. A big educational experience for me was watching the day9 dailies on how he's going about establishing just a early game. It took how many dozens of games to just try and get a halfway decent feel for the first 5 minutes of the game and where he would like to be at that first 5 minutes. When you try to account for everything that your opponent can do, and what timings they are, you just start to scratch the surface of what is possible, and what is optimal. As fans, we are somewhat spoiled by watching pro players who as of today, stand on the shoulders of many highly skilled players who have come before. The thought process that established the current metagame of SC1 took years to develop.

If you want to say as a whole, that units die too fast and/or do too much damage, i would tend to agree, but that is easily patchable. The look and feel of this game is great. Just wait until professional map makers get a hold of the map editor and you will see a true balance for the game. As we know from watching Proleague, etc, that maps re-balance the power of starcraft, even from season to season. Having one unit area more or less can alter the outcome of a lot of battles. Have faith, i believe most of us do.
LunarC
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
United States1186 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-28 20:44:39
February 28 2010 20:42 GMT
#22
Thanks for reading my post OP, but I don't think you understood my main points the way I intended. My fault for being such an unclear writer, haha. I didn't mean to say that static defenses and buildings were too underpowered. What I was saying was that units in general were mobile enough to meet the enemy on many fronts. It's also because there are certain air units, the most mobile in the game, are not capital ships yet do significant damage to buildings and ground units. It's the issue of over-mobility that's making bases harder to defend and it's over-mobility that allows players to simply A-move to control their armies. It's not that decisive battles will be fought this way but even skirmishes and such will be fought this way. Mutalisks in SC1 were unique in that they were fairly robust enough in a group to exert pressure directly onto the base, preventing the army from moving out. Now, we have Reapers, Stalkers, Banshees, and Vikings in addition to Mutalisks that are units that can easily move into the opponent's base and wreak havoc without a significant micro commitment. Micro shouldn't be limited to pulling units, focus firing, and spell casting. It should also encourage large army control. To make controlling a large army more micro intensive, units in the army should have to be controlled differently from each other and certain units should be less mobile. This will make good positioning and simply holding strategic locations drastically more important than roving around the map or A-moving into bases. There should be an advantage in mobility and an advantage in holding ground. That makes for dynamic battle. Hopefully the SC2 metagame changes a lot and I'm proven completely wrong. Otherwise I think what I'm saying is true to an extent.
REEBUH!!!
Niten
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
United States598 Posts
February 28 2010 20:58 GMT
#23
On March 01 2010 04:07 Drazzzt wrote:
To be honest. You all are giving me hope^^


Good! Capitalize on that

I think Day9 said it in a daily, but it's very true. Blizz has a track record of not fucking up your games. The recent Blizzcast further cements my trust in Blizz with Browder coming out to say that the team will do whatever is necessary to make it as good as can be.
Korra: "Ok, I know that I'm not good at emotions, but that's what Tenzin's gonna teach me, right? He's gonna teach me to be happy and gentle and spiritual, and the rest of that bullsh**t."
Squallcloud
Profile Joined February 2008
France466 Posts
February 28 2010 21:18 GMT
#24
On March 01 2010 05:58 Truenappa wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 04:07 Drazzzt wrote:
To be honest. You all are giving me hope^^


Good! Capitalize on that

I think Day9 said it in a daily, but it's very true. Blizz has a track record of not fucking up your games. The recent Blizzcast further cements my trust in Blizz with Browder coming out to say that the team will do whatever is necessary to make it as good as can be.


Agree!! Seriously even the lost vikings is a good game!! :p
Firebathero fanboy - It's not that i'm dumb i'm just controlled by a retarded infestor - Day[9]
Moutas
Profile Joined April 2007
Greece158 Posts
February 28 2010 21:36 GMT
#25
First of all, why is everyone using the term "metagame" in random posts lately? Half of the times I don't even know what they want to say. That I can't understand...

I think the reason behind players not investing too much in static defense is because all 3 races can produce large amount of armies quite fast. Blizzard wanted to make SC2 matches end much faster than SC, so having hatches/raxes/gates making massive amounts of units in very short time makes it somewhat unnecessary to make any static defence. I've seen numerous replays where players can reach somewhere near 100 population within 7-8 minutes and off one base.

Not only are troops produced faster, but imo they also move faster, and on some maps the distance between mains is really small, for example Steppes of War, LT (3v6 & 9v12), Metalopolis (left bases and right bases). So anyone that sees their opponent leaving their base might not have enough time to set-up their defense. Why bother anyways, a couple of cannons that are slow to build and have no mobility probably won't make any major difference in the outcome of the battle.

Minerals are also mined way faster than before, I've seen Protoss players support something like 5 gates easily from one base.

The only reasons why I think anyone should invest in static defence is if they choose to FE or need detection.

BTW I see that SC2 upgrades are so much cheaper than before (ovi speed, warp gates 50/50 wtf?) so that means many players can afford to choose more technologies to research (toss also has chrono boost which is like imba for upgrades). In SC if you went for any reaver/dt drop or something then you lacked detection and goon range which meant you need to do serious damage with those few units your strategy is based on so you don't lose like a newb. If you succeeded in that then you could expo and then tech range and make a few observers.
aka DeA & GRC-DeathLink
Krolinkos
Profile Joined February 2010
Australia74 Posts
February 28 2010 21:37 GMT
#26
On March 01 2010 05:58 Truenappa wrote:
Blizz has a track record of not fucking up your games.


This. I really think doomsaying judgement is far too premature. I'm confident that Blizz will get it right, especially by the time that the dust from the second expansion pack settles.
Unashamedly nerdy.
Liquid`Jinro
Profile Blog Joined September 2002
Sweden33719 Posts
February 28 2010 21:39 GMT
#27
On March 01 2010 05:13 OverShield wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 04:59 Squeegy wrote:
On March 01 2010 04:51 OverShield wrote:
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).


Stopped reading here. No. Just.... no. No.

No.

The entire WC3 metagame revolves around harassing your opponent and because creeping is so imperative to the outcome of the game you are constantly in contact with the other player's army. Games are typically very back-and-forth.

I know you all hate WC3 but please stop making shit up.


Of course what he made was an over-simplification, but actually yes, that is pretty much how Warcraft 3 is.


Actually no, that's not at all how it is. Because there are so many micro opportunities in the game that is very rarely the case. Players will usually clash several times before there is a decisive battle. The fact that there is less macro/bases/defensive positioning obviously means that a decisive battle will be just that: decisive. In SC it took a lot more to break through a line of tanks, yes, but that doesn't mean that WC3 is some mindless clash that is an instant win or lose. In fact, the inclusion of town portal (being able to teleport back to base) allows you to salvage your army and live to fight another day. I'm by no means a great player but even in most of my matches I'll have to pick away at my opponent before I overtake them, unless I'm doing an all in tower push or something. Even with towerpushes though I've witnessed many pros play an extended 10-15 with several towers inside their base. And even if you lose much of your army, excellent hero usage can give you the opportunity to still win the game.

Everything OverShield says here is basically 100% correct and I agree ;P Maybe people making these comments base them on the original WC3 which was a lot more "turtle and creep".
Moderatortell the guy that interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terrans variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes - Stimey n | Formerly FrozenArbiter
DefMatrixUltra
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada1992 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-28 22:18:31
February 28 2010 21:43 GMT
#28
Starcraft II seems, if anything, faster paced than Starcraft. Economies blow up faster, tech is reached faster, units in general are fast compared to map size, lots of units do big damage in a small amount of time. It seems like macro is even more important and even more difficult (at least for Zerg and Protoss).

There are a lot of complaints about the game not being strategic enough. While I don't/can't disagree with lots of top players that feel this way, I am perfectly happy with waiting to see what happens. I really think there is a lot of opportunity for optimization of builds and micro that even the best players miss. There are things that exist in this game that are 'foreign' or just new, and I believe those haven't been fully explored either. I think people haven't really sat down and hardcore analyzed replays. So I'm generally optimistic about how Starcraft II will turn out.

However, one thing that really bothers me, is the high ground issue. I agree that having high ground is very powerful in the early game when most people don't have something to give them vision. But late game, breaking up a ramp is just as easy as breaking down a ramp would be in Starcraft. This seems like a strategic mistake to me. It makes having an army stronger than it should be (players should be favoring expanding and the like if their opponent is turtling). The high damage that units put out makes this issue a little bit worse, but I don't think that's the real problem.

/edit - spelling mistake
LunarC
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
United States1186 Posts
February 28 2010 21:55 GMT
#29
The speed is the issue. Is Starcraft 2 too fast-paced for its own good? Do these high speed games make strategically tense gameplay? More tech, more abilities, more counters, faster units, faster speed doesn't necessarily mean more strategic depth, more micro intensive battles, more strategic army movement. I think Starcraft 2 might be placing the speed of battle into the wrong aspect of the game, and I honestly think the current macro mechanics might be somewhat messing with the speed at which the game is played... ..though I could just spouting nonsense.
REEBUH!!!
Squeegy
Profile Joined October 2009
Finland1166 Posts
February 28 2010 22:06 GMT
#30
On March 01 2010 06:39 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 05:13 OverShield wrote:
On March 01 2010 04:59 Squeegy wrote:
On March 01 2010 04:51 OverShield wrote:
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).


Stopped reading here. No. Just.... no. No.

No.

The entire WC3 metagame revolves around harassing your opponent and because creeping is so imperative to the outcome of the game you are constantly in contact with the other player's army. Games are typically very back-and-forth.

I know you all hate WC3 but please stop making shit up.


Of course what he made was an over-simplification, but actually yes, that is pretty much how Warcraft 3 is.


Actually no, that's not at all how it is. Because there are so many micro opportunities in the game that is very rarely the case. Players will usually clash several times before there is a decisive battle. The fact that there is less macro/bases/defensive positioning obviously means that a decisive battle will be just that: decisive. In SC it took a lot more to break through a line of tanks, yes, but that doesn't mean that WC3 is some mindless clash that is an instant win or lose. In fact, the inclusion of town portal (being able to teleport back to base) allows you to salvage your army and live to fight another day. I'm by no means a great player but even in most of my matches I'll have to pick away at my opponent before I overtake them, unless I'm doing an all in tower push or something. Even with towerpushes though I've witnessed many pros play an extended 10-15 with several towers inside their base. And even if you lose much of your army, excellent hero usage can give you the opportunity to still win the game.

Everything OverShield says here is basically 100% correct and I agree ;P Maybe people making these comments base them on the original WC3 which was a lot more "turtle and creep".


But what he said isn't really in disagreement with what I said.
Stan: Dude, dolphins are intelligent and friendly. Cartman: Intelligent and friendly on rye bread with some mayonnaise.
decemberscalm
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States1353 Posts
February 28 2010 22:07 GMT
#31
The increased speed will INCREASE the skill cap. I'm glad SC2 is a bit faster as it raises the bar for pros. The only thing I worry about is the strategy in battles being too simple.
DefMatrixUltra
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada1992 Posts
February 28 2010 22:18 GMT
#32
On March 01 2010 06:55 LunarC wrote:
The speed is the issue. Is Starcraft 2 too fast-paced for its own good? Do these high speed games make strategically tense gameplay? More tech, more abilities, more counters, faster units, faster speed doesn't necessarily mean more strategic depth, more micro intensive battles, more strategic army movement. I think Starcraft 2 might be placing the speed of battle into the wrong aspect of the game, and I honestly think the current macro mechanics might be somewhat messing with the speed at which the game is played... ..though I could just spouting nonsense.


If there was a faster speed in BW, would the game be less strategic? If so, couldn't we just get everyone to play on Slow to make the game strategic as possible? These are kind of tough questions that don't have single, simple answers. I think the speed is an issue right now for BW players, but I am optimistic and think that players will adapt to the new flow of gameplay. A brilliant strategy will still be brilliant even if the games are slightly shorter.
infinity2k9
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
United Kingdom2397 Posts
February 28 2010 22:38 GMT
#33
On March 01 2010 07:18 DefMatrixUltra wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 06:55 LunarC wrote:
The speed is the issue. Is Starcraft 2 too fast-paced for its own good? Do these high speed games make strategically tense gameplay? More tech, more abilities, more counters, faster units, faster speed doesn't necessarily mean more strategic depth, more micro intensive battles, more strategic army movement. I think Starcraft 2 might be placing the speed of battle into the wrong aspect of the game, and I honestly think the current macro mechanics might be somewhat messing with the speed at which the game is played... ..though I could just spouting nonsense.


If there was a faster speed in BW, would the game be less strategic? If so, couldn't we just get everyone to play on Slow to make the game strategic as possible? These are kind of tough questions that don't have single, simple answers. I think the speed is an issue right now for BW players, but I am optimistic and think that players will adapt to the new flow of gameplay. A brilliant strategy will still be brilliant even if the games are slightly shorter.


The problem is possibly more the fact theres less units to slow the pace of the game down, not the fact its literally faster. Tanks/lurkers/mines etc.
Lefnui
Profile Joined November 2008
United States753 Posts
February 28 2010 22:44 GMT
#34
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).

That's not true at all. There is very often harassment, small skirmishes, numerous TPs and small, early-game battles over creeps. Warcraft III is dynamic and it usually doesn't even get to the point where there are two large, powerful forces from both players. The massive advantage a player attains from superior hero/heroes often proves to be decisive. With that in mind Warcraft III may have even more of a "slippery slope" effect than Starcraft.

I know that it's natural for people here to heavily favor SC over WC3 since this is a SC forum. But it's frustrating how often totally inaccurate and demeaning things are said regarding Warcraft III. I have a feeling most people here are just total newbs in WC3 and have no sense of the game at all. There's nothing wrong with that of course, but then you shouldn't comment on it.
OverShield
Profile Joined February 2010
Canada41 Posts
February 28 2010 23:10 GMT
#35
On March 01 2010 07:44 Lefnui wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).

That's not true at all. There is very often harassment, small skirmishes, numerous TPs and small, early-game battles over creeps. Warcraft III is dynamic and it usually doesn't even get to the point where there are two large, powerful forces from both players. The massive advantage a player attains from superior hero/heroes often proves to be decisive. With that in mind Warcraft III may have even more of a "slippery slope" effect than Starcraft.

I know that it's natural for people here to heavily favor SC over WC3 since this is a SC forum. But it's frustrating how often totally inaccurate and demeaning things are said regarding Warcraft III. I have a feeling most people here are just total newbs in WC3 and have no sense of the game at all. There's nothing wrong with that of course, but then you shouldn't comment on it.


Cosign everything.
Squeegy
Profile Joined October 2009
Finland1166 Posts
February 28 2010 23:16 GMT
#36
On March 01 2010 07:44 Lefnui wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).

That's not true at all. There is very often harassment, small skirmishes, numerous TPs and small, early-game battles over creeps. Warcraft III is dynamic and it usually doesn't even get to the point where there are two large, powerful forces from both players. The massive advantage a player attains from superior hero/heroes often proves to be decisive. With that in mind Warcraft III may have even more of a "slippery slope" effect than Starcraft.

I know that it's natural for people here to heavily favor SC over WC3 since this is a SC forum. But it's frustrating how often totally inaccurate and demeaning things are said regarding Warcraft III. I have a feeling most people here are just total newbs in WC3 and have no sense of the game at all. There's nothing wrong with that of course, but then you shouldn't comment on it.


I give five cents to the guy who understand why this does not counter the post it tries to counter barely at all.
Stan: Dude, dolphins are intelligent and friendly. Cartman: Intelligent and friendly on rye bread with some mayonnaise.
DefMatrixUltra
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada1992 Posts
February 28 2010 23:20 GMT
#37
On March 01 2010 07:38 infinity2k9 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 07:18 DefMatrixUltra wrote:
On March 01 2010 06:55 LunarC wrote:
The speed is the issue. Is Starcraft 2 too fast-paced for its own good? Do these high speed games make strategically tense gameplay? More tech, more abilities, more counters, faster units, faster speed doesn't necessarily mean more strategic depth, more micro intensive battles, more strategic army movement. I think Starcraft 2 might be placing the speed of battle into the wrong aspect of the game, and I honestly think the current macro mechanics might be somewhat messing with the speed at which the game is played... ..though I could just spouting nonsense.


If there was a faster speed in BW, would the game be less strategic? If so, couldn't we just get everyone to play on Slow to make the game strategic as possible? These are kind of tough questions that don't have single, simple answers. I think the speed is an issue right now for BW players, but I am optimistic and think that players will adapt to the new flow of gameplay. A brilliant strategy will still be brilliant even if the games are slightly shorter.


The problem is possibly more the fact theres less units to slow the pace of the game down, not the fact its literally faster. Tanks/lurkers/mines etc.


The high ground mechanic plays into this as well. But I think play will evolve and people will find ways to 'slow' the pace of a game down to more of a macro-war style. Units like the Immortal are a strong deterrent to attacking a position without having the perfect composition. But you're right that missing lurkers and 'cheap' tanks and so on adds to this effect. The biggest thing adding to this effect is the faster economy and production. Every race has a way to pump out a massive number of units in a short time period. This is a departure from BW that is fundamentally new, and it's something that has to be figured out.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
February 28 2010 23:30 GMT
#38
On March 01 2010 06:55 LunarC wrote:
The speed is the issue. Is Starcraft 2 too fast-paced for its own good? Do these high speed games make strategically tense gameplay? More tech, more abilities, more counters, faster units, faster speed doesn't necessarily mean more strategic depth, more micro intensive battles, more strategic army movement. I think Starcraft 2 might be placing the speed of battle into the wrong aspect of the game, and I honestly think the current macro mechanics might be somewhat messing with the speed at which the game is played... ..though I could just spouting nonsense.


I think that a lot of what we perceive as a speed increase also has to do with our ignorance of the game. In Starcraft 1, we all had such a firm foundational knowledge of the game that a lot of things seemed natural and it flowed very smoothly. Even after playing around 100 games, I still feel as though there are a lot of times that I fall behind simply because it doesn't come as naturally as SC1 yet. So even though we know how to play games at a fast speed and whatnot, we lack the understanding to do so easily.
OverShield
Profile Joined February 2010
Canada41 Posts
February 28 2010 23:47 GMT
#39
On March 01 2010 08:16 Squeegy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 01 2010 07:44 Lefnui wrote:
On March 01 2010 03:36 Drazzzt wrote:
I was thinking quite a lot about what I liked about SC:BW and what I didn't like about WC3. I came to the conclusion that Smorrie was kinda right. WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided (apart from the immense power of the heros and the fateful increasing "army" cost at higher supplies).

That's not true at all. There is very often harassment, small skirmishes, numerous TPs and small, early-game battles over creeps. Warcraft III is dynamic and it usually doesn't even get to the point where there are two large, powerful forces from both players. The massive advantage a player attains from superior hero/heroes often proves to be decisive. With that in mind Warcraft III may have even more of a "slippery slope" effect than Starcraft.

I know that it's natural for people here to heavily favor SC over WC3 since this is a SC forum. But it's frustrating how often totally inaccurate and demeaning things are said regarding Warcraft III. I have a feeling most people here are just total newbs in WC3 and have no sense of the game at all. There's nothing wrong with that of course, but then you shouldn't comment on it.


I give five cents to the guy who understand why this does not counter the post it tries to counter barely at all.


Hey buddy. You wanna let us in on your little secret? How are none of these posts countering what you and others are saying about WC3?

"WC3 is more about waiting to get the right army composition and then the big armies collide and if one annihilates another, the game is pretty much decided"

No, "There is very often harassment, small skirmishes, numerous TPs and small, early-game battles over creeps. Warcraft III is dynamic and it usually doesn't even get to the point where there are two large, powerful forces from both players."

Comprende? Not really that difficult.
Hammy
Profile Joined January 2009
France828 Posts
March 01 2010 00:05 GMT
#40
On March 01 2010 03:47 StarsPride wrote:
im sure they said the same about SC when switching from wc2.

I can imagine the discussions:
-OMG wtf man, 12 units can be selected? This is bs, blizzard is making ez mode games now...
-Dude chill, it's only beta, it'll never stick.


To OP:
I disagree with you regarding static defenses. Actually I find that towers in general are pretty good as long as they have a minimum of backup (which is the way they should be). I find that the efficiency of static versus armies is pretty much just right, and I can tell you that I absolutely hate it when protoss place a tower+lots at a ramp because he gains a huge tactical advantage.

Regarding building hit-points, I agree to some extent. In some scenarios it seems too easy to focus down buildings, specifically with void rays or reapers, but I don't think it's gamebreaking. I'm not saying balance is perfect, but I guess it can be a viable strategy to focus down one building, and that makes every move from a player all the more critical. However, I do think that some buildings should get a few more hitpoints.

As for your point about strategy: for now, all strats sort of look alike but one unit is better in most circumstances than another in each matchup... A>B>C>D>A....
When's the last time I've made a roach in ZvT? A muta in ZvZ? How about an infestor in any matchup?
I might be wrong for not making these units in these matchups, and I hope I am, but right now I would love to see some more versatility from certain units. For the time being, I barely feel like I'm responding to my enemy's strategies in ZvT and ZvZ. I just follow my build, and I either beat them or lose on a technicality like placement, not because of my army composition (so not because of my game plan). In ZvP, I had a bit more of a choice until 50% of the Protoss out there started void-ray rushing on ramp maps, so now I don't have the option of ling-baneling ownage, or roach into hydra plays because all of that is too slow to be able to break his front early on, and too slow to transition for anti-air.

Basically, although I agree with some of your points, my conclusion is a bit different: I think that hard-counters should be toned down a bit, and that aiming for perfect execution with the softer counter of your choice (and there would always be more than one possibility) would be a better alternative.

Although I've only got about 90 games played, and everything is changing so quickly, I'm playing against other relatively high-rank platinum players so I think these games provide at least a spec of material for balance. However, in the end, all anyone can do is wait and see : )
Prev 1 2 3 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 12h 8m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nathanias 213
Nina 116
StarCraft: Brood War
Sexy 10
ivOry 8
Dota 2
monkeys_forever877
League of Legends
Dendi1000
syndereN180
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1681
Stewie2K822
Super Smash Bros
Liquid`Ken37
Other Games
summit1g10126
tarik_tv4288
FrodaN2849
C9.Mang0199
ViBE168
PPMD53
ToD44
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 84
• davetesta45
• musti20045 35
• Kozan
• Migwel
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• blackmanpl 47
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• TFBlade401
Other Games
• imaqtpie1573
• Shiphtur431
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
12h 8m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
15h 8m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 11h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 15h
CSO Cup
1d 17h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 19h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.