|
There have been quite a large coalition against the Starcraft 2 beta in terms of select units acquiring the dreaded "OP" status. A title that only a few units wear shamefully in both its predecessor Broodwar, and the current installment. But, this is nothing new. With starcraft 2 units acquiring the hard counter system with enhanced AI, this is to be expected, especially from the starcraft community who is more familiar with more "soft counters" then hard, as the reasoning being is that any unit can kill another with proper positioning and micro.
![[image loading]](http://sclegacy.com/features/pp/pp03/images/pphm_firebat.jpg) Well... Almost any unit
Yet even now we can see the resurrection of old beliefs that despite this hard counter system currently cemented in the game, there are ways to overcome such concerns. The most basic, which is what is now visibly seen currently, is just out macroing the opponent to the point where hard counters are nothing more than a poor speed bump. This ironically correlates to old zerg thinking about just a mass swarm of units, constantly being chucked at the enemy till he eventually breaks. For awhile (as we have witnessed in Broodwar), this was the case where it broke down to who had the most stuff, it was not until quite much time later were more unique tactics developed and improved upon to further enhance ones chances of winning by relying on unconventional unit commands.
![[image loading]](http://img.youtube.com/vi/-hH2Wl168qE/0.jpg) "Did you hear something?"
It of course brings us to the main problem in starcraft 2, it isn't the implementation of the hard counter system, but how the units in the game where developed and introduced that cause such a conflicting factor. It can be reasonable to accept that hard counters exist in Starcraft:Brood War. But to the extent that Starcraft Two is at? Hardly. When units were developed in Broodwar, they were designed for a specific 'niche'. Such as the lurker against infantry, or the corsair against air, and with the addition of micro and tactical awareness, additional use for these units could be achieved. Example can obviously be seen with mutalisk micro. It was intended to be a air support flier, but was it ever thought that it could prevent large waves of terran infantry? Oh heavens no! But nothing stopped such a thing from occurring.
Unfortunately, this philosophy did not return to the Blizzard team during the development of Starcraft 2. Rather, they sought to take the initiative by building a unit around the specific role they wanted it to fill, instead of just developing a unit to each race that filled a niche then leaving it to the players to develop its aspect. What this causes is overlapping, and limited life of units. An example of this can be seen with the reaper. It was designed with the full intention to be a raider, and it does it quite well, doing an astonishing 30 damage per 1.6 seconds to buildings. Unfortunately, that is all it does, and all it ever will. The fact that a reaper can't hold its own in any serious fight against other units is quite alarming, which forces the reaper in the very tight spot that it is in now. Whether this is something Blizzard sought to achieve matters not, but it raises valid controversy over the stock of these units who have limited use. Compared to broodwar, where every unit could have an extended use one way or the other (Vulture is a scary base raider after using its mines, hydras can morph into very devastating defending units, dark templars are an excellent scouting tool/expansion denier, and at times can be an accepted fighter in battles because of its high damage output).
![[image loading]](http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y61/fathom216/starcraft2lol.jpg) Carriers : Making facepalms since 1998.
Now, I am not going to say Starcraft Two will ever evolve to a point where niche units wont be discovered, there are still plenty of unrevealed units who are begging for a place in gameplay and eventually, we will see them in standard builds. For all we know rushing for mothership could very well be a valid strategy in a couple of years time. But the dilemma that faces many of us, is that there is a large amount of units that have a limited life span in the duration of the game brought on even more rapidly with the current counter system. Obviously the great players out there will stretch a unit's use as long as possible, but only so much can be achieved.
I hope this smallish page is enough to stop some of those chanting "op!" and instead focus on finding extended uses for their units. Be creative, its a new game, and most importantly its a new start for those of us who want to become as unpredictable as possible. (TLO has already won many hearts doing this!) And if patches just so happen to bring about Nerf's/Buffs to your main race, try to use it to your advantage. Or if nothing else, use something more unconventional to use them. No one says you have to play a specific way to gain a win.
On April 25 2010 03:35 Energizer wrote:For those of you who already mentioned - I am terribly sorry for causing such confusion with the terms "niche" and "role". It comes from my lack of proper writing skills  so to help clear the message, ill define what I mean more clearly as per below and add this into the OP. Again, terribly sorry for that. When I refer to role, I purposely mean that a selective unit (whether it be a reaper, immortal, etc..) has been implemented for one specific purpose in the game without much leeway into additional uses. As like I said, reaper was designed for the harassment role, but it cannot be easily seen as a main army composition due to its lack of HP and attack power. Same can be said for many other units like Immortal which was solely introduced as a counter unit to everything armored. As for the term niche, I refer that to any unit that was made as being part of a 'grouping' that wasn't necessary made to counter any specific unit and can easily change roles. Such as the lurker, it can be a very strong defensive unit securing expos, or it can be a very powerful anti-infantry tool on aggression. Or to become more modernized, the sentry which can be a strong defensive, or extremely ideal for aggression as Protoss while not having any major bonus damage being attributed to the unit to make it good. Yes, I know both words have the same dictionary value, but I was troubled in finding another type of term to replace the existing ones, something I'm very sorry for!
|
Terrific post man, couldn't agree more. Haha I think you've contributed more in your singular 60th post than i have so far in all of mine. Way to raise the bar. Cheers! 
|
Good post Energize, and I think what you say is definitely true. I think there will always be a number of exasperating nerds that want any and every reason to have their race be "the best"! or aren't going to go out of their way to test the game extensively.
All in all, good post, and I hope more of "those" people will read this and understand hard counters are a part of every game, and that's the point of a strategy game is to adapt and learn on the fly.
|
I'm extremely interested in the viable strategies yet to be discovered for this game. SC2 is still so young (well yes, IndecisivePenguin, it is in beta afterall), but we're already seeing some exciting new developments being made by the players. Of course Blizzard will need to perfect this game in the way it can best, but the players are going to be the true determinants of how great this game will be.
Look at BW. Twelve whole years and people are still finding new things. I definitely hope to see the same in SC2. And after we play through Wings of Liberty a while, we have two more expansions to look forward to! New units, new strategies, new gameplay. But I can already tell there's a lot on our plate right now with this game.
I'm excited. 
|
This post reminded me of luckyfools video about starcraft 7 years in 7 minutes
|
I don't really see the argument.
Rather, they sought to take the initiative by building a unit around the specific role they wanted it to fill, instead of just developing a unit to each race that filled a niche
This doesn't make any sense to me. Building a unit for a role and building a unit for a niche is the same thing. You're right they did it in Starcraft. They are also doing it in Starcraft 2. The way Brood War works is not is how it was intended to be played, and that's something you can't really design for.
|
man, do i ever love banelings. definitely one of my favorite units
|
Things are still currently in beta. More and more units become more and less viable with each patch. Early on Thor drops were unheard of, now they are pretty common. As you said 12 years after new strategies are coming out, but SC2 has only been in beta for 2 months. Give it time and it will evolve.
|
op units and spell add fun and challenge to the game
|
Pretty images and a good format don't save an article from a bad and biased assumption. I'm getting the arguement you're trying to make, but I'm not seeing how you're making it or what you hope they'll change. I've pretty much had it with all this hard-counter whining, and the thought that you think you can tell from this point (in the BETA!!) how far the metagame will or won't develop is being several different kinds of snobby.
The one thing we can agree on is the last paragraph. The rest is pure nonsense.
|
On April 24 2010 09:46 GogoKodo wrote:
I don't really see the argument.
Rather, they sought to take the initiative by building a unit around the specific role they wanted it to fill, instead of just developing a unit to each race that filled a niche
This doesn't make any sense to me. Building a unit for a role and building a unit for a niche is the same thing. You're right they did it in Starcraft. They are also doing it in Starcraft 2. The way Brood War works is not is how it was intended to be played, and that's something you can't really design for.
His post isn't really about how units fill niches, etc. It is about how too many people simply resign into crying OP, without testing possible viable strats, and not enough people take the initiative to test out builds and don't give into the OP argument.
This happens with every game, and what you need to do to become a top player is ignore what you think is imbalanced and work to find ways to beat it no matter what it may be. There is a reason players like orb are set to like 2 total builds, and its because he has no initiative to take on the role of finding a way past more intuitive builds.
It is basically saying don't be the guy that cries OP, and Blizz will take care of the balance.. it's not like they aren't watching.
|
Banelings are the new lurker, you can beat banelings with good micro and positioning (reapers rock here too), it's just hard, hard like beating lurkers with marines.
The vid was pretty unconvincing, T had plenty of time to focus the banelings down. All those marines would die to one storm too if they just stood there.
That said I still don't see the hard counters existing any more than in BW (immortal aside)
Abritrary "it's still beta and SC1 was so horribly bad in beta"
A niche is a role btw, you'll have to clarify on what you actually mean. and reapers can hold their own, with micro ( a lot, another "problem" with stalkers needing a lot of micro)
They beat pretty much everything melee if you let them and can do very respectable damage to light ranged if they aren't focused.
I agree that new fancy uses may be constantly found forever, though I hope that the units are diversified even more so multiple ways of controlling units come into play...
|
I think that the notion that starcraft/broodwar was all about soft counters is a bit of unintentional historical revisionism by most players.
Lets think back, was the concept of soft counters in broodwar really there when the game was new? Or did they evolve over time as the game was played for ten years?
Maybe my memory fails me but I seem to recall that when starcraft was new it felt like any other hard counter game and every strategy site had the same kind of counter listings as any starcraft 2 site would have now. The firebat counters the zealot, the science vessel counters the archon etc etc.
Soft counters is something that develops over time as players improve in the game, when the game is still in beta the only counter that you are going to see clearly is the hard counters.
|
On April 24 2010 09:38 Swiftice wrote:This post reminded me of luckyfools video about starcraft 7 years in 7 minutes
Interesting video. Enjoyed it a lot.
|
what a great post. really makes ya think haha, mothership rushing ;D
|
"TLO has already won many hearts doing this!"
i cannot agree more
|
On April 24 2010 16:14 DanceCommander wrote:
what a great post. really makes ya think haha, mothership rushing ;D
Mothership rushing is great
Just make sure your becaon's not late
Their black hole's amazing
To do some sweet razing
Zerg bases - I'm sure you'll relate.
|
I agree on the fact that sc2 units are pigeon holed bigtime
|
|
|
On April 24 2010 09:38 Swiftice wrote:This post reminded me of luckyfools video about starcraft 7 years in 7 minutes
Great video, really brings back some halarious memories.
And good post by the OP aswell. I agree, a lot of units seem underexplored in terms of their continued use. Innovators are already out there (glad you mentioned TLO, but there are quite a few others i've run across too) trying new things. That being said, I do think there are some rather obvious balance issues that I hope to the devs take notice of in the near future. I don't really think we're at a place where true innovation can take off just yet, but we're getting pretty close.
|
The game is still in beta.. they will tweek it if they find the need..
|
So they nurffed the queen movement off creep which puts a hamper on my proxy tumor attempts. Doesn't mean I won't stop trying! Never say OP and always keep testing till the end.
|
Nicely written article. I enjoyed the read.
|
For those of you who already mentioned - I am terribly sorry for causing such confusion with the terms "niche" and "role". It comes from my lack of proper writing skills so to help clear the message, ill define what I mean more clearly as per below and add this into the OP. Again, terribly sorry for that.
When I refer to role, I purposely mean that a selective unit (whether it be a reaper, immortal, etc..) has been implemented for one specific purpose in the game without much leeway into additional uses. As like I said, reaper was designed for the harassment role, but it cannot be easily seen as a main army composition due to its lack of HP and attack power. Same can be said for many other units like Immortal which was solely introduced as a counter unit to everything armored.
As for the term niche, I refer that to any unit that was made as being part of a 'grouping' that wasn't necessary made to counter any specific unit and can easily change roles. Such as the lurker, it can be a very strong defensive unit securing expos, or it can be a very powerful anti-infantry tool on aggression. Or to become more modernized, the sentry which can be a strong defensive, or extremely ideal for aggression as Protoss while not having any major bonus damage being attributed to the unit to make it good.
Yes, I know both words have the same dictionary value, but I was troubled in finding another type of term to replace the existing ones, something I'm very sorry for!
|
|
|
On April 24 2010 16:23 Frozz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2010 16:14 DanceCommander wrote:
what a great post. really makes ya think haha, mothership rushing ;D Mothership rushing is great Just make sure your becaon's not late Their black hole's amazing To do some sweet razing Zerg bases - I'm sure you'll relate.
Hahaha... Limericks are so awesome. Every time you read them it's like a song. A truly great beat for a poem structure.
And to the OP, I couldn't agree more. SC2 just doesn't give you quite as much freedom with how you want to use a unit.
|
umm the dude who got raped by banelings couldve just microed O_o that helps and attacked the banelings rather then let them get in close and blow him up, just a thought
|
good read! when i 1st read the title i thought this was some post about people's threads or something
|
|
|
Well, the Hard Counter System isn't necessarily a bad thing, as it has the ability to shift focus a bit more on strategy (i.e. which unit when) than on micro.
Not to say I don't wanna see good micro, but good strategy is just as important, and I do think SC2 has a lot of potential for micro which has to be seen by players yet.
|
Although there have already been a lot of posts about things being OP in starcraft 1 and how we should avoid it, I belive this is a great thread.
Don't try to complain to get something nerfed, figure out a way to counter it with use of micro and abilities.
|
you do know the game is in beta right?
it takes time to get shit fixed to where its balanced like sc:bw
its not gonna do it over night
|
i think that this really sums things up. Also the hard counter system is a large change but once you get used to it its not too bad
|
On April 25 2010 03:35 Energizer wrote:
When I refer to role, I purposely mean that a selective unit (whether it be a reaper, immortal, etc..) has been implemented for one specific purpose in the game without much leeway into additional uses. As like I said, reaper was designed for the harassment role, but it cannot be easily seen as a main army composition due to its lack of HP and attack power.
I incorperate reapers into my main army all the time. They're fantastic! They deal a ton of damage to buildings and when in the middle of a blob they're really hard to pick out and snipe. Here's an example;
I open two-rax-techlab reaper and do some harass. Great! The reaper has fulfilled the purpose it was designed to do. After my harass, I add two more rax with reactors, a factory with a tech lab, and a starport with a reactor and start pumping marines tanks/thors and medivacs. With my original two techlab barracks I make a handful of marauders and maybe a ghost or two, but I also try to get in 4-6 reapers. Once I attack (Say, from the back-door on Incineration), my opponent sees what's happening and transfers his drones away from his main into his natural. My six reapers can now separate from the army and pick off drones easily now that they're (temporarily) out of the protection of spine crawlers at the mineral lines. Once they've picked off all they can, the reapers can rejoin the main army and be very effective building-razers, certainly much more effective than my mostly-marine army. And if he tries to counterattack with anything but roaches or marauders, the reapers do amazing DPS while comfortably in the protection of my ball of units. Also, any time I raze a building (Which should be often if this attack is to be successful), my reapers help clean up the broodling residue
Creative use extending the lifespan of the reaper beyond the first five minutes, ezpz.
On April 25 2010 04:52 briann wrote:
i think that this really sums things up. Also the hard counter system is a large change but once you get used to it its not too bad
Something tells me you don't know what you mean when you say "hard counter system". What's the difference between vultures doing 20 damage/half to large in Brood War and a port of them here doing 10 damage + 10 light?
|
I think I see more threads telling people not to call something OP than I see threads actually calling something OP.
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
Rather, they sought to take the initiative by building a unit around the specific role they wanted it to fill, instead of just developing a unit to each race that filled a niche then leaving it to the players to develop its aspect.
False. First, Blizzard's stated SC2 design philosophy was to come up with cool unit ideas and then try to balance them.
Second, most BW units were designed with a specific role in mind. Corsairs to solve the Mutalisk problem which had been the bane of all Protoss. Devourers and Valkyries to deal with mass air (this was before Scout and Wraith ground attacks were nerfed and when island maps were popular). Medics to rectify Terran's inherit inability to repair bio which made them terribly inefficient.
|
SC1 almost the EXACT same 'hard counter' system that everyone complains about.
|
On April 25 2010 05:14 ComradeDover wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2010 03:35 Energizer wrote:
When I refer to role, I purposely mean that a selective unit (whether it be a reaper, immortal, etc..) has been implemented for one specific purpose in the game without much leeway into additional uses. As like I said, reaper was designed for the harassment role, but it cannot be easily seen as a main army composition due to its lack of HP and attack power. I incorperate reapers into my main army all the time. They're fantastic! They deal a ton of damage to buildings and when in the middle of a blob they're really hard to pick out and snipe. Here's an example; I open two-rax-techlab reaper and do some harass. Great! The reaper has fulfilled the purpose it was designed to do. After my harass, I add two more rax with reactors, a factory with a tech lab, and a starport with a reactor and start pumping marines tanks/thors and medivacs. With my original two techlab barracks I make a handful of marauders and maybe a ghost or two, but I also try to get in 4-6 reapers. Once I attack (Say, from the back-door on Incineration), my opponent sees what's happening and transfers his drones away from his main into his natural. My six reapers can now separate from the army and pick off drones easily now that they're (temporarily) out of the protection of spine crawlers at the mineral lines. Once they've picked off all they can, the reapers can rejoin the main army and be very effective building-razers, certainly much more effective than my mostly-marine army. And if he tries to counterattack with anything but roaches or marauders, the reapers do amazing DPS while comfortably in the protection of my ball of units. Also, any time I raze a building (Which should be often if this attack is to be successful), my reapers help clean up the broodling residue Creative use extending the lifespan of the reaper beyond the first five minutes, ezpz. Show nested quote +On April 25 2010 04:52 briann wrote:
i think that this really sums things up. Also the hard counter system is a large change but once you get used to it its not too bad Something tells me you don't know what you mean when you say "hard counter system". What's the difference between vultures doing 20 damage/half to large in Brood War and a port of them here doing 10 damage + 10 light?
Vultures did 25% to large units, and the difference between the damage systems in BW and SC2 is that damage is scaled down in BW and up in SC2.
|
On April 25 2010 05:17 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think I see more threads telling people not to call something OP than I see threads actually calling something OP.
The patch 9 notes has about twenty threads worth of bitching condensed.
Truth be told, you can probably attribute your experience due to the responsive moderation in this forum. Threads calling things overpowered quickly end up Closed.
|
On April 25 2010 05:21 TieN.nS) wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2010 05:14 ComradeDover wrote:On April 25 2010 03:35 Energizer wrote:
When I refer to role, I purposely mean that a selective unit (whether it be a reaper, immortal, etc..) has been implemented for one specific purpose in the game without much leeway into additional uses. As like I said, reaper was designed for the harassment role, but it cannot be easily seen as a main army composition due to its lack of HP and attack power. I incorperate reapers into my main army all the time. They're fantastic! They deal a ton of damage to buildings and when in the middle of a blob they're really hard to pick out and snipe. Here's an example; I open two-rax-techlab reaper and do some harass. Great! The reaper has fulfilled the purpose it was designed to do. After my harass, I add two more rax with reactors, a factory with a tech lab, and a starport with a reactor and start pumping marines tanks/thors and medivacs. With my original two techlab barracks I make a handful of marauders and maybe a ghost or two, but I also try to get in 4-6 reapers. Once I attack (Say, from the back-door on Incineration), my opponent sees what's happening and transfers his drones away from his main into his natural. My six reapers can now separate from the army and pick off drones easily now that they're (temporarily) out of the protection of spine crawlers at the mineral lines. Once they've picked off all they can, the reapers can rejoin the main army and be very effective building-razers, certainly much more effective than my mostly-marine army. And if he tries to counterattack with anything but roaches or marauders, the reapers do amazing DPS while comfortably in the protection of my ball of units. Also, any time I raze a building (Which should be often if this attack is to be successful), my reapers help clean up the broodling residue Creative use extending the lifespan of the reaper beyond the first five minutes, ezpz. On April 25 2010 04:52 briann wrote:
i think that this really sums things up. Also the hard counter system is a large change but once you get used to it its not too bad Something tells me you don't know what you mean when you say "hard counter system". What's the difference between vultures doing 20 damage/half to large in Brood War and a port of them here doing 10 damage + 10 light? Vultures did 25% to large units, and the difference between the damage systems in BW and SC2 is that damage is scaled down in BW and up in SC2.
But the end result is the same. Unless you have a problem with plus signs, I don't see the issue. 10+10small or 20/half to small gives you the exact same result. They're different ways of writing the same thing.
The only real difference is that it's now very clear which unit deals how much damage to what. In Brood War the only way to figure out vultures aren't good against large targets is to build a bunch and try attacking ultralisks with them, and that's not good for anybody.
|
good point. i've seen few streamers experimenting with units except delita. If they all experimented with units, something magical might occur (like the awesome infestor micro). =D
|
Well a Reaper costs less than a scan (consider mules) or any flying Terran unit, so I'm guessing they make pretty decent suicide scouts, depending on the map layout.
Also on one map a Reaper can activate a Xel'Naga watchtower on the low ground and keep it activated while standing on the high ground next to it.
It's also funny to see a offensive bunker with Reapers, they throw their explosives right out of the bunker at buildings.
|
Awesome post, a pleasure to read
Agree 100%
|
On April 25 2010 05:26 shieldbreak wrote:
good point. i've seen few streamers experimenting with units except delita. If they all experimented with units, something magical might occur (like the awesome infestor micro). =D
Just because it isn't being stream doesn't mean it isn't happening. Like Protoss victories, for example. If you watched -orb-'s stream, you'd think that Protoss were the worst race in the game, when really it's just orb, and Protoss has the highest win rate by a significant margin.
|
On April 25 2010 06:26 ComradeDover wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2010 05:26 shieldbreak wrote:
good point. i've seen few streamers experimenting with units except delita. If they all experimented with units, something magical might occur (like the awesome infestor micro). =D Just because it isn't being stream doesn't mean it isn't happening. Like Protoss victories, for example. If you watched -orb-'s stream, you'd think that Protoss were the worst race in the game, when really it's just orb, and Protoss has the highest win rate by a significant margin.
While I won't disagree with you on orbs nerdrage being pretty riddic, I would some numbers to support this claim...
|
On April 25 2010 06:42 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2010 06:26 ComradeDover wrote:On April 25 2010 05:26 shieldbreak wrote:
good point. i've seen few streamers experimenting with units except delita. If they all experimented with units, something magical might occur (like the awesome infestor micro). =D Just because it isn't being stream doesn't mean it isn't happening. Like Protoss victories, for example. If you watched -orb-'s stream, you'd think that Protoss were the worst race in the game, when really it's just orb, and Protoss has the highest win rate by a significant margin. While I won't disagree with you on orbs nerdrage being pretty riddic, I would some numbers to support this claim...
Some DB interview where he said that most matchups are within 1% winrate of each other, except PvT is 55-45 in favor of the Protoss.
|
sry, i've just had it with this "hard counter" hoax. who came up with it anyways?
there's basically only "armored", "anything but armored" or "air unit" that really matters, and mostly these units counter each other and almost always counter themselves.
all TLO does is find some obvious power the self declared elitists have dismissed with their standard builds. to whom was his recent infestor game really a surprise?
the latter is also the reason why there's such a discrepancy between the servers. zergs rule on asia, huh?
too bad goat queues one game after another - he'd really have the potential to come up with something new if he'd focus on finding it. but alas he's just making stuff up as he goes... i wish i had his feeling for timings... 8[
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
This is amazing.
Pure and simple.
Also, lol at Frozz. Trozz wannabe?
|
I think he is seeing the past too rosy. Considering all the barely used units in Brood War, from Queen to Scout. or all the units that almost exclusively got used in one match up (medics). Or the many many strategies that used only one quick batch of specific unit (most wraith builds).
Strategies will evolve.
|
Brood War doesn’t emphasize on hard counters as StarCraft 2 does or so I wanted to say at first. But after a second thought SC1 has similar flaws as WoL has actually – it can be summarized by one simple definition:
Partial or complete Unit/Strategy denial.
As mentioned above both games have it:
Look at the Tanks/Reavers/PsiStorm against Medic/Marin in BW and compare it to Immortals versus any armored Terran’s “mech” unit in SC2; or Irradiate/Corsair versus Mutas in SC1 compared to Colossi vs Marines in SC2: apparently in both games one certain Unit/Strategy completely (or partially) denies the other one, which is what hard counters is all about.
Is it a bad thing for the game? Looking at 11 years of BW’s success it can be said with confidence that advantages of the implemented balance model outweigh its flaws.
But the main question is:
Does SC2 balance model have enough potential to represent enough game quality from the players’ and observers’ perspective as SC1 has?
As it is now my opinion on the matter is somewhat negative: SC2 in most cases is boring to watch (rarely I see something as inspiring as SC1 can ‘produce’) and doesn’t have the same ‘make believe’ feel when playing it as SC1 has.
|
On April 24 2010 09:25 Energizer wrote:
Carriers : Making facepalms since 1998.
made my day :D
|
great post - I agree people should try out as many new things as possible. However, I think the fact that you can't easily play an unranked game (must use custom game) stops many people from doing so.
|
Great post except for the whole problem that this exact same thing has been posted/articled/front paged just about constantly since beta released.
Seriously it was a good read, unfortunately I have already read the same thing a few..dozen..times.
|
great read. i agree with the whol bneling ithng
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
