EPTAnyway great interview. I look forward to seeing the final product (SC 2) on launch day.
Nazgul interview - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Dr.Frost
United States389 Posts
Anyway great interview. I look forward to seeing the final product (SC 2) on launch day. | ||
|
norlock
Netherlands918 Posts
OK i will take any game for example, but every game that is new looks crap at the start. The reason is simple, people don't know anything yet about skills, but they are talking about it like they have played it over years. How do you know there is no micro? A lot of micro tricks still need to be invented, think about splitting up units and whatever, i still see people suicide MnM into banelings. And there is still so much to discover. Phoenix can be used tons more effectively, and I can continue like this. Because there are many micro tricks you will get from experience. How do you know that macro is less? I mean how many people play the game the same like bw? people need to learn how to use apm more effectivly now things like the 12 units box selection is gone. You can now use that lost apm in controlling more groups at the same time. The mule/queen/boost thing need to be used more effictively. And still so many things to discover, what will replace your old macro skills. OK the start of a game is qua macro easier, but it doesn't change a lot in the outcome of the game. Is position play that much needed? how can you complain about position play I mean yes it is a commen thing in sc1, but don't you think we get things in return? No people in sc2 can't just sit in there base and wait until they have enough units. Drops, banelings and mothership for instance forces players to put presure on the enemy, and people forgot how fast minerals deplete. And believe me just because some things are more simple it doesn't mean that there is no way of differ yourself from the rest. OK don't take this to serious but it is a small argument. In Ra3 the noobiest game there is, is still a common top10. Players who practice a lot and are talented are still in the top there. How? Because it is not always the big difference the makes the game, but also small differences. And because micro is easier, you still require a little bit better micro than the enemy to win. (sorry for my bad grammer i am dutch) | ||
|
lu_cid
United States428 Posts
| ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
How do you know there is no micro? A lot of micro tricks still need to be invented, think about splitting up units and whatever, i still see people suicide MnM into banelings. And there is still so much to discover. Phoenix can be used tons more effectively, and I can continue like this. Because there are many micro tricks you will get from experience. I agree, in almost all replays I've watched player 1 sends his supergroup into player 2's supergroup and they have the unit lvl AI duke it out(and this is at platinum level). As the players get more experienced I'm sure that they will all realize that his is infact a pretty stupid way to handle things and start splitting their army up and we'll see much more micro. How do you know that macro is less? I mean how many people play the game the same like bw? people need to learn how to use apm more effectivly now things like the 12 units box selection is gone. You can now use that lost apm in controlling more groups at the same time. The mule/queen/boost thing need to be used more effictively. And still so many things to discover, what will replace your old macro skills. OK the start of a game is qua macro easier, but it doesn't change a lot in the outcome of the game. Ye, watching replays the top players struggle a lot at using the MULE properly, there's definitely a lot of room for improvement. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 05 2010 09:23 lu_cid wrote: SC2 is going to end up a low skill ceiling game (compared to broodwar) because nothing in the game is physically difficult to execute. I'm actually laughing at this right now. You know why? Because a couple threads over, there's a thread about how bad the Hellion is. Why do people think it's bad? Because they can't micro it. Yet, CowGoMoo, arguably the best player in beta right now, consistently opens with Hellions in TvZ. And you know what? He does some pretty nice micro with them. And he's the only one doing it. You know what that tells me? That microing Hellions is hard. | ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
And you know what? He does some pretty nice micro with them. And he's the only one doing it. You know what that tells me? That microing Hellions is hard. Actually, from watching his replays it seems the trick is to not micro them. If you try to micro them like they're vultures you'll fail miserably because their fire animation is too long. What CowGoMoo does is that is utilize the fact that they fire in a straight line, so he just gives his Helions a move order to walk to the side of the enemy army, they all fire a barrage and the entire enemy army goes up in flames, so they're kinda like the Terran Colossus. The fact that people other then him are unable to perform this extremely simple move is to me baffling. | ||
|
chobopeon
United States7342 Posts
On March 05 2010 09:08 Dr.Frost wrote: I am starting to think it is people's ego saying the skill ceiling is too low. Seems like because it is a new game and they are not familiar with proper builds like they were in SC 1 they are losing to lesser players and saying the game is too easy because they are frustrated at their loss. I could be wrong but this seems like it is what is going on. I think BW players have in the long run a better chance than WC III players at being the best but it seems like BW players are so cocky and expect to already be super good at the game just because they played BW. It is a new game and ALOT is different. That is why you are losing. Anyway great interview. I look forward to seeing the final product (SC 2) on launch day. Nazgul and Inka and others of this opinion are doing pretty well. And people holding the opposite opinion are doing pretty well, too - eg Drone. I don't that you can chalk either side up to ego. I can't comment either way but both sides seem to have valid points! We'll see. Anyway, thanks for reading  | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 05 2010 09:33 Zironic wrote: Actually, from watching his replays it seems the trick is to not micro them. If you try to micro them like they're vultures you'll fail miserably because their fire animation is too long. What CowGoMoo does is that is utilize the fact that they fire in a straight line, so he just gives his Helions a move order to walk to the side of the enemy army, they all fire a barrage and the entire enemy army goes up in flames, so they're kinda like the Terran Colossus. Big surprise, they're not vultures. I'll bet you'd fail pretty hard if you tried to micro Dragoons like vultures too. Does that mean you can't micro Dragoons? Hardly. | ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
Big surprise, they're not vultures. I'll bet you'd fail pretty hard if you tried to micro Dragoons like vultures too. Does that mean you can't micro Dragoons? Hardly. Indeed, that's the point. A lot of people seem to think that they're a shitty replacement for Vultures, when infact they're more mobile firebats. | ||
Liquid`Zephyr
United States996 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
there were so many games of starcraft I was able to easily come back and win vs worse opponents because I outmicro'd them. so far it looks like this won't be the case in sc2. and as a result of this not only will there be more luck involved but there will be fewer viable build orders because there is less you can pull off with micro. | ||
|
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
Did anyone at TL or any other site [ when they visited Blizzard or the game developers ] actually bring up the points that Nazgul did? Or did everyone not ask simply to avoid having awkward straightforward questions. I guess it would be hard for them to respond but I wonder what Morhaime/Browder etc would say if you said, "Look we know the financial aspect is part of the game, and you are making a huge deal about publicly supporting the competitive bw community and trying to bring in progamers etc...where do you draw the line?" | ||
|
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
On March 05 2010 05:50 Wintermute wrote: Well when people talk about hard vs soft counters as if that is something embedded in the DNA of the game, then they are being premature, I think. When they talk about the effects of improved pathing AI and interface, I don't think they are necessarily being premature. When it really comes down to it, a large part of being "pro" at SC/BW is being able to wrestle with terrible pathing, a mediocre interface, and fairly rampant "glitches" like muta stacking. Taking away these aspects improve the game experience for 95% of the population, but they also narrow the gap in skill between the most dedicated pros and the average to above average players. This is a normal outcome for improved technology. When printing presses were invented, the gap between the common man and the highly educated narrows. The gap between what I know (or can find out on my own) and what my doctor knows is narrower today than it was before the internet came along to provide online diagnostic health information. Better AI and interface makes "pro" player more accessible to the average gamer, but of course it does nothing for pros except to make the game feel more shallow. The only solution (the one that Blizzard has chosen) is to speed up the game, so that the challenge comes from superior reaction and instinct and less from nimble control. The skill set for SC2 will be similar, but still very different from the skill set for SC/BW, and that is something that people simply have to accept if they are going to enjoy it. goood post. you name the basic issue true sc:bw fans have with the new game. i like the analogy with printing presses that enabled the common man (every noob) to execute tasks which had been exclusive for the highly educated (pros) before. | ||
|
Pupsilein
Germany17 Posts
Now imagine the player micros his stalkers creatively, uses the terrain to blink, sets chokes, focuses fire and so on, while the zerg player uses burrow, puts wounded troops out of fire to regenerate, uses some form of creep advantage and so on. There are probably lots of more tricks one could use that I don't think of or which are not yet discovered by the pros. Isn't that "watchable"? I'm sure that the player with the better micro will win this fight. And there are usually more fights in a match and all sorts of unit combinations. Nobody knows how many micro tricks are yet to be discovered and new ones introduced through patches or the next expansions. | ||
|
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
(example for micro, fictive numbers) SC:BW: Micro: 50 Difficulty through "manual" AI: 50 Difficulty / required skill to control game sufficiently: 100 ______ SCII: Micro: 50 (minus steps done by AI = ~40?) Difficulty through "automatic" AI: 25 Difficulty / required skill to control game sufficiently: 75 (65?) OVERALL it's an easier/simplified game, even if you micro some of your units (if need be). This example shall just illustrate what my line of thought is. SC:BW also HAD all those things you had to do with your units to micro them perfectly PLUS the harder level because of lacking "auto AI". That micro wasn't needed at all in SCII is not of the discussion, just that it's less important / needed. | ||
|
norlock
Netherlands918 Posts
| ||
|
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
and on a more serious note: this concept isn't thought through 100%. to regard AI and micro that fights versus interface mechanics separately and then count it together to one factor "difficulty" is just a way of looking at things. the only thing it should do was illustrate that it's of course not forbidden to apply micro in SCII, just that it's questionable if the AI isn't too intelligent so that it's not as effective as in SC:BW. "the game plays for you". | ||
| ||
