EPTOh Micro, Where Art Thou? - Page 50
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
FusionCutter
Canada974 Posts
| ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
OP missed that Banshees can dance perfectly so I'm not going to be surprised if more units can do that too. On April 28 2010 12:34 Xenocide_Knight wrote: Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything
It's not different micro, its LESS micro it's not different strategy, its LESS strategy .. Against Terran due to limited selection 100% Zerg skip Lurker stage as fast as they can and get spell that makes their units immortal. Protoss gets Arbiters to freeze opponent's units. While those spells are fun to watch how is that supposed to be a valid example when most of the top players simply avoid that. I would rather say people A-move as much as they can because most of the more sophisticated micro isn't rewarding enough. Begineers are actually adviced not to care about their units at all. How is Vulture kiting supposed to be difficult? You P click behind (no, not 180 degrees behind) the Vulture and then rightclick in front of it that's all. Every other form of kiting has it's equvalent in SC2 and is more difficult against melee units due to auto-surround. About the other points (except for the 1st and the 2nd) it's pretty damn early to claim that. If it will happen to be the other way around then the 1st and the 2nd will be irrevelant - skill (that may be) needed is simply transitioned somewhere else. TvP has already more varied army composition. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
Now I ask you. If even frickin Mario can micro why cant hellions!!!!! | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:23 Archerofaiur wrote: Now I ask you. If even frickin Mario can micro why cant hellions!!!!! You just put a link to a video in image tags. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:08 Liquid_Turbo wrote: The mere fact that this discussion has toiled on for 49 pages shows that it's a very valid concern. Does it? While moving shot might be one type of micro and the currently implemented version is debatable it is NOT everything which is called "micro". I am no expert, but there are a lot of new nifty things to micro with, so I dont think the OP is right. The current version of aerial attacks + movement seems to make them do less damage by slowing down the attacks, but Blizzard tried to add some realism (inertia) into the game mechanics. Sadly they only looked towards air while adding realism. IMO the mechanics which prevent stacking air units should be applied to ground units as well ... to prevent the really tight infantry balls of units(*1). That is the much larger reason why SC2 doesnt feel like BW. So I think this whole moving shot micro is only a part of the issue. Why prevent stacking of air unbits when you allow it for ground? (*1) These are a problem, because they provide too big of an advantage for an "all-in" concentration of firepower. You can fit a 200/200 SC2 ground army on part of a screen, but you cant do the same in Brood War. Defending multiple bases with spread out units is impossible in SC2, but it was in BW. Thus a strategic option was lost and that is a much bigger loss than being able to micro flyers. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:27 beetlelisk wrote: You just put a link to a video in image tags. Gamestrailer. Not youtube. | ||
|
shalafiend
United States62 Posts
of course..die hard sc2 fans can just mod/hack the game- chatrooms, mutastack possibilites galore but that will raise a shitstorm with blizzard..so lets hope fan feedback gets through.. nice article i feel like all good games were made before the fps craze hit, and before whiny teenagers infiltrated the forums and trolled about everything. super smash melee is still the definite game of skill (wavedash) while super smash brawl was toned down for the masses of noobish consumers complaining about hard games.. | ||
|
cartoon]x
United States606 Posts
| ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On April 28 2010 10:11 Ace wrote: Sigh, now I see why most of the forum vets hardly post in here. Listen, some of you don't even understand what the OP is about. If you have Unit A that is supposed to counter unit B but it can't due to game mechanics giving one side an advantage in engagement because the other has to decelerate to shoot the aggressor dictates where the battle takes place. The defender can't defend inside his own base due to having to chase->stop->fire instead of in BW where you could chase->fire->chase micro your air units. Huge difference. I had to put that in extremely layman's terms but hopefully SOME of you that are discussing in here stop making stuff up and learn what is being said. Ever stop to think that maybe the Phoenix isn't supposed to counter mutas, since its graviton beam ability is absurdly good already? | ||
|
alexanderzero
United States659 Posts
On April 28 2010 12:34 Xenocide_Knight wrote: Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything
It's not different micro, its LESS micro it's not different strategy, its LESS strategy Please read the below quotes Interestingly, anyone who understand broodwar will realize, on TOP of all this, you have to watch for arbiter stasis, mine drags, plant mine fields, focus reavers and dodge scarabs, build turrets, watch for zealot bombs, etc etc.. Macro is BW is more difficult because...? BW didn't even have macro mechanics like chronoboost, mules, larva, ect. These macro mechanics all represent strategic decisions (Such as choosing to use energy from an orbital command on a mule or scan, or chronoboosting economy vs. unit production). As for the claim that BW had better army diversity... Really? I don't know what games you've been watching, but many high level SC2 games feature almost all of the units available. Just look at TvT now, it's not that unlikely to see every Terran unit make an appearance at some point during the game. There are a few underutilized units in SC2, but the same is true of BW was well. As for strategy in SC2. The beta has only been around for a few months and there are tons of different strategies being employed. To me it seems like there still hasn't been an established, standard play style for each match up. There are so many different things that your opponent can open with, let alone try to finish the game with. On the subject of micro, I still maintain my position that it is different micro. A good example is the hellion. Everyone rags on this unit for having to stop when it fires. I happen to think this makes the unit way more exciting then if it could fire while moving. Every time you want to attack you have to commit to being in a specific position for a period of time. Choose the wrong moment or the wrong spot and not only could your attack be ineffective, but you may be put at risk and get killed. Certain other strategies like phoenix harass can be very micro intensive as well. I believe that SC2 has the potential for an extreme level of micro. Given the diversity in how every unit functions, if there were a player godly enough to multi task with every unit effectively, they would be absolutely dominant. I just happen to think that people aren't good enough at SC2 yet to claim that the game isn't as intense as BW. I read those two quotes you showed me. I don't understand what you showed me them for, they only seem to work against your point that SC2 is easier than BW because I see a similar amount of actions being taken in both situations... Oh yeah, and also this: "Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything" Worker split, YEAH! | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
Well that makes sense and isn't derailing this thread at all. Video itself has totally something to show. | ||
|
emikochan
United Kingdom232 Posts
I hope blizz sees this, as i'm sure the editor is capable of fixing acceleration rates, so they could easily change that number in the vanilla game too. | ||
|
Xenocide_Knight
Korea (South)2625 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:42 alexanderzero wrote: Macro is BW is more difficult because...? BW didn't even have macro mechanics like chronoboost, mules, larva, ect. These macro mechanics all represent strategic decisions (Such as choosing to use energy from an orbital command on a mule or scan, or chronoboosting economy vs. unit production). As for the claim that BW had better army diversity... Really? I don't know what games you've been watching, but many high level SC2 games feature almost all of the units available. Just look at TvT now, it's not that unlikely to see every Terran unit make an appearance at some point during the game. There are a few underutilized units in SC2, but the same is true of BW was well. As for strategy in SC2. The beta has only been around for a few months and there are tons of different strategies being employed. To me it seems like there still hasn't been an established, standard play style for each match up. There are so many different things that your opponent can open with, let alone try to finish the game with. On the subject of micro, I still maintain my position that it is different micro. A good example is the hellion. Everyone rags on this unit for having to stop when it fires. I happen to think this makes the unit way more exciting then if it could fire while moving. Every time you want to attack you have to commit to being in a specific position for a period of time. Choose the wrong moment or the wrong spot and not only could your attack be ineffective, but you may be put at risk and get killed. Certain other strategies like phoenix harass can be very micro intensive as well. I believe that SC2 has the potential for an extreme level of micro. Given the diversity in how every unit functions, if there were a player godly enough to multi task with every unit effectively, they would be absolutely dominant. I just happen to think that people aren't good enough at SC2 yet to claim that the game isn't as intense as BW. I read those two quotes you showed me. I don't understand what you showed me them for, they only seem to work against your point that SC2 is easier than BW because I see a similar amount of actions being taken in both situations... Oh yeah, and also this: "Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything" Worker split, YEAH! starting from the bottom up I'm not sure if that was sarcasm but worker split is harder in BW.. it's non existant in sc2? Concerning the two quotes, the first quote is what people like you are saying "Oh look at the difficult micro and strategical depth in sc2!" The second quote is the broodwar equivalent, and the paragraph under it states that broodwar had much more things to do on TOP of that. That's why broodwar is MUCH more difficult. About micro, the fact that hellions have to stop to shoot.. how the fuck is that micro? That's the norm for all units. The problem is that there are no units that CAN shoot while moving. thats where the micro comes in.. vulture patrol micro, muta vs scourge micro, muta control in general, archon vs muta, etc was MUCH harder than marauders shoot, move back, oh wait enemy is even slower now lol or stalkers shoot, move back, oh i fucked up, oh wait i can just teleport or even hydra/roach/immortal/marine kiting in both sc and BW however, kiting in broodwar was much harder. Try hydras vs zeals in sc2. Then try hydra vs zeals in BW. You tell me why BW is so much harder. You clearly did not read the entire thread. I don't blame you but i'm getting tired of repeating myself every few hours. Chronoboosting takes the same number of clicks as manual mining. What to chronoboost is NOT a strategical decision, it will be part of the Build Order. If I go for fast expand as zerg in BW, is it a strategical decision to put my hatch down at 10 or 12? No, its not a decision at all. In context of a standard 3 hatch build, the hatchery at 12 is mathematically more efficient. Same will happen for chronoboost. You will chronoboost your nexus at __ supply and then at __ supply, you will chrono boost your 1st stalker and then chornoboost your nexus again. Once your robobay is down, you will chronoboost your immortal. Those are not decisions to make. Those are a set of build orders that are optimized. Deviation from the build may occur depending on your opponent's build. THIS IS NOT STRATEGICAL DECISION MAKING EDIT: oh and as i've said before, macro is harder in broodwar beacuse in the heat of battle, I can't tell you how many times i've messed up pressing 5sh6sh7sh8ss9sz0so Like, my mind registers I need to macro but between muta microing, hydra microing, storm dodging, and expanding, my hand just freaks out and I have misclicks/keys everywhere in sc2, I just take a second to go (i play terran in sc2) 5dddddddd6ss7dd the easiest part is, since it's essential a 3 part motion, I can take a second between 5dddd and 6ss to micro something really essential. in BW, I found it incredibly difficult to go 5sh6sh7sh oh shit reaver drop pull drones 8sh9ss oh shit muta micro 0so dodge storm macro accomplished | ||
|
Xenocide_Knight
Korea (South)2625 Posts
On April 28 2010 13:17 beetlelisk wrote: Now that it's proven it's not removed but disabled I have a strong feeling everything OP claims to be non existant is simply harder due to things like easier macro or ~250 units selection limit. OP missed that Banshees can dance perfectly so I'm not going to be surprised if more units can do that too. Against Terran due to limited selection 100% Zerg skip Lurker stage as fast as they can and get spell that makes their units immortal. Protoss gets Arbiters to freeze opponent's units. While those spells are fun to watch how is that supposed to be a valid example when most of the top players simply avoid that. I would rather say people A-move as much as they can because most of the more sophisticated micro isn't rewarding enough. Begineers are actually adviced not to care about their units at all. How is Vulture kiting supposed to be difficult? You P click behind (no, not 180 degrees behind) the Vulture and then rightclick in front of it that's all. Every other form of kiting has it's equvalent in SC2 and is more difficult against melee units due to auto-surround. About the other points (except for the 1st and the 2nd) it's pretty damn early to claim that. If it will happen to be the other way around then the 1st and the 2nd will be irrevelant - skill (that may be) needed is simply transitioned somewhere else. TvP has already more varied army composition. and you! er.. i don't think I understand your post. Because if I'm reading correctly, you're saying zerg players try to skip lurker stage to rush swarm. Beacuse of unit.. selection.. limit.. wat that bolded section, I have 0 idea what you're trying to say. Like it doesnt make sense english-wise. most top players simply avoid what? stasis? and on micro vulture patrol micro, muta vs scourge micro, muta control in general, archon vs muta, etc was MUCH harder than marauders shoot, move back, oh wait enemy is even slower now lol or stalkers shoot, move back, oh i fucked up, oh wait i can just teleport or even hydra/roach/immortal/marine kiting in both sc and BW (hint, try hydra vs zeal in sc2, then in BW. Which is harder?) And it's not too early to claim that, it might be too late. SC2 has had 12 years of history to learn on. The players have had 12 years to learn about RTS games. SC2 is held to the same standard that BW is held to NOW. Kind of like how at the beginning of 2nd grade, you are held to the same standard at the end of 1st grade. It's called progress. | ||
|
alexanderzero
United States659 Posts
| ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On April 28 2010 12:34 Xenocide_Knight wrote: Please name 1 thing in sc2 that is more difficult than it's broodwar counterpart micro, strategy, macro, anything
It's not different micro, its LESS micro it's not different strategy, its LESS strategy Please read the below quotes Interestingly, anyone who understand broodwar will realize, on TOP of all this, you have to watch for arbiter stasis, mine drags, plant mine fields, focus reavers and dodge scarabs, build turrets, watch for zealot bombs, etc etc.. Chronoboosting opens up an entire strategic dynamic and choice, while manaul mining is nothing more than a pointless dickwaving APM sink that really adds nothing to the game. Macro is more difficult simply because of an outdated interface. Had the engine allowed MBS in 1998 they would have used it. | ||
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
On April 28 2010 14:17 PanzerDragoon wrote: Chronoboosting opens up an entire strategic dynamic and choice, while manaul mining is nothing more than a pointless dickwaving APM sink that really adds nothing to the game. Macro is more difficult simply because of an outdated interface. Had the engine allowed MBS in 1998 they would have used it. Good points, and i agree, sc2 has opened up a bit more strategy in terms of macro decision making (scanning vs. mule, chrono probes vs. chrono a unit or an upgrade, spawn larva or heal another unit to survive a rush). I really dislike the stance some players are taking here that sc2 is a giant step back in all ways just because of the whole attack animation change. One door has closed (and may yet be opened, who knows) and a few new doors need exploring. People shouldn't be too quick to write sc2 off just because it's not a 3d version of brood war and it's balance is slightly wonky in beta. | ||
|
mfukar
Greece41 Posts
On April 28 2010 02:25 Garrl wrote: Heh, copper league players telling BW players to get a grip. Cute. This just in from Platinum league: Get a grip, Garry boy. | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
Honestly, if you had to manually mine and couldn't warp in from warpgates, you guys would be going bonkers over Blink micro. But no, let's just act like it doesn't exist, nor the rest of the micro available >.> Also, I consider the Hellion "Micro" to be a much more accurate display of skill than Vulture micro. With the Hellions, you have to THINK where and when you will attack, accurately predict the opponents movements, then specifically target units that would optimize your damage. Note that this thinking is hard to do when you're also macroing up. As for Vultures, you just messed around with P and Click, with little-to-no thought going into it. Hellion kiting isn't as simple as other kiting styles. As for move-shot, I don't know. Taking on a force of larger numbers with a REASONABLE amount of units yourself is normally in your favor if the unit in question is supposed to "counter" another (i.e. Phoenix vs Muta). Having 1 Corsair kill 834978 Mutalisks because you can infinitely click inside of a game that totally ignores physics doesn't appeal to me. Complaining that your inferior number of units loses to a superior number is pretty ridiculous, given that it isn't something like "Why is 1 Thor losing to 2 mutas?" (made up scenario) | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On April 28 2010 14:12 Xenocide_Knight wrote: and you! er.. i don't think I understand your post. Because if I'm reading correctly, you're saying zerg players try to skip lurker stage to rush swarm. Beacuse of unit.. selection.. limit.. wat that bolded section, I have 0 idea what you're trying to say. Like it doesnt make sense english-wise. most top players simply avoid what? stasis? and on micro vulture patrol micro, muta vs scourge micro, muta control in general, archon vs muta, etc was MUCH harder than marauders shoot, move back, oh wait enemy is even slower now lol or stalkers shoot, move back, oh i fucked up, oh wait i can just teleport or even hydra/roach/immortal/marine kiting in both sc and BW (hint, try hydra vs zeal in sc2, then in BW. Which is harder?) And it's not too early to claim that, it might be too late. SC2 has had 12 years of history to learn on. The players have had 12 years to learn about RTS games. SC2 is held to the same standard that BW is held to NOW. Kind of like how at the beginning of 2nd grade, you are held to the same standard at the end of 1st grade. It's called progress. *Often avoid flanking until they get spells that are simply easier to use instead. You have all of that micro except for Scourge that were cut. Reapers not Hellions are equivalent to Vultures and since they have to turn around it's more difficult to micro them. It's the same for muta control in general, archon vs muta - this whole thread is about attack-move micro being weaker or even non-existant so how can you say it's easier?? I am going to be severely dissapointed if even Patrol makes units first to slow down and then shoot but I've already seen units firing before they completely slow down. If the only way to make air units clump is to spam move near them AND you have to order units to move after firing at least as fast as in BW AND if only Patrol prevents units from slowing down unlike 3 orders in BW - Attack, Hold Position and Patrol then it's fucking hard; definitely harder. The only easier aspect is how fast Mutas start to shoot once they are in range but that's evened out by making them clump so much harder - actually less Mutas are in range when you compare it to BW Muta stacking. edit: and I don't think saying that you can have a lot more flyers selected at once matters at all because to be efficient they need to be close to each other and there is enough AoE to punish them once they do are. Holding standards and trying to claim that the game is solved and there are no new strategies to invent are 2 separate cases. You are trying to prove that it's not holding those standards because you think you've seen everything. | ||
| ||
