On April 30 2010 17:10 madcow305 wrote:On April 30 2010 14:41 Half wrote:You're list shows exactly why Micro doesn't matter as much in SC2.
Starcraft 1
1. Hit when the Terran is moving his tanks unsieged.
Huge Advantage. Often instant win.
2. Mine-drag with his Zealots.
Huge Advantage
3. Form a good firing arc, doing max damage and taking min damage.
Moderate Advantage
4. Stasis the tanks in the back, so as not to create an invincible wall of tanks the Dragoons have to walk around.
Huge advantage. Often Instant win.
5. Storm the biggest clumps of tanks he can find.
Huge Advantage. Often instant win.
6. Dodge EMPs, particularly with Arbiters and HTs
Moderate Advantage
7. Stasis Vessels with leftover energy to prevent detection.
Huge Advantage. Often instant win.
8. move-shoot his Dragoons, and target-fire tanks when necessary, making sure to minimize overkill.
Moderate Advantage
9. Goons need to always be shooting tanks, and not Vultures/Goliaths/Vessels.
Huge Advantage.
======================================================
Starcraft2
1. Form a good firing arc, doing max damage and taking min damage.
Moderate Advantage
2. Keep GS on his whole army while using as little energy from his Sentries as possible.
This doesn't require micro. Hitting G three times is not micro.
3. Use Forcefield to disrupt the Terran firing arc, and to keep reinforcements back.
Huge Advantage. Often instant win.
4. Target-fire with his Colossi on the Terran's Marines and Ghosts. Because 2 Colossi shots kill a Marine, he needs to micro every pair of Colossi and have them shoot down all the Marine/Ghost clumps first, as fast as he can. At the same time, he needs to reduce overkill, and not target-fire with more than 2 Colossi at a time.
Moderate Advantage
5. Immortals need to always be shooting at Marauders, not Ghosts/Marines, because of the bonus damage factor. Again, reduce overkill.
Minor Advantage
6. Sentries need to always be shooting biological targets, due to their bonus damage vs. them.
stfu you don't have any idea what you're talking about advantage.
7. Templar need to be Feedbacking Ghosts as fast as possible.
Huge Advantage
8. Templars need to be Storming M&M clumps.
Incredibly easy to preform. Differences between skill in preforming is minor advantage.
9. The entire army needs to dodge EMPs, especially the Templar.
Not possible to dodge EMP, there instant. Micro is on behalf of terran player only.
10. Medivacs can be feedbacked with remaining templar energy.
Moderate Advantage.
11. Stalkers need to be Blinked as close to the Vikings as possible to target-fire them, and minimize Colossi losses.
This isn't even done. Not would anyone want to, as this would now put your most marauder vulnerable unit in front of your zealots.
In Starcraft 2, their are a grand total of 1 thing I can do that would dramatically change the battle if done right. Only two things give me huge advantages.
Thirdly, yes, Dragoon vs. Mine/Tank/EMP micro is comparable to SC2 Stalker micro. I am going to cover a lategame PvT from SC1 vs. SC2 earlier in my reply. Please refer to that and tell me if I'm wrong and missing micro requirements.
Are you kidding me? The -APM required to dance Dragoons alone is equivalent to stalker micro. Let alone zealot dropping and stasis spamming.
Seriously, you display a pretty abysmal knowledge of SC2. You have to understand how things actually work before you can contribute relavently to a debate. fyi nobody blinks their stalkers in front of there zealots into a big ball of marauders, and Sentries don't do bonus damage versus light. Manually targeting Immortals is ridiculously pointless in late game battles. That's from that list alone.
Also, units don't overkill in SC2.
Sentries gain a bonus vs. Biological targets. Marines, Marauders, and Ghosts are Biological. Medivacs and Vikings are not. Thanks for showing you're in such a rush to post your own opinions about how good an advantage something is that you can't even properly read what I posted.
Oh, and covering your army with GS isn't as simple as hitting it three times. Maybe the three Sentries that trigger GS are all on one side of your army, meaning the side that you're flanking with has no GS to cover it. Or, maybe those three Sentries are bunched up on the right flank of your troops, and your left flank is exposed.
Or, for the easiest example, maybe your Zealots Charge in faster than your Sentries can keep up, so you have to micro a few and move them closer to the Zealots before they charge in, so they can always be under GS. Your narrow-minded thinking about SC2 Micro is really showing here, with this GS example. There are plenty of times where hitting G x3 isn't enough.
And yes, it is possible to dodge EMP, depending on your army positioning. If you spread your Immortals out far enough that it takes 4 EMPs to hit them all, and the Terran only has 4 Ghosts, then he only has a few EMPs left to hit your HT with. If you Feedback 2 more of them, then he has even less. Then, if you spread your HT out, one EMP can't get all of them. Hence, you just "dodged" most of the EMPs coming from 4 Ghosts.
HT Micro also comes into play, in that you don't want to move your HT too close to the Ghosts. Dance forward, Feedback/Storm, and dance back, just like Arbiters did in SC1 to Stasis back rows of tanks, then move away from Goliath/EMPs. EMP was near-instant in SC1 too, the missile traveled relatively fast compared to the movement speed of the Arbiter. Of course, most of the time Progamers didn't bother saving their Arbiters, since an Arbiter with no energy from using Stasis wasn't worth the APM it took to save it. However, that doesn't mean it's not something you shouldn't do now in SC2, since it requires less APM to play.
Stalkers can be Blinked into shooting range to kill Vikings, yet still be behind the Zealot line. Just because you've never done it, doesn't mean it can't be done. Besides, Marauders have the same range as Stalkers. Whether they Blink closer or not has no bearing on whether the Marauders can hit them; Marauders will always be able to shoot Stalkers if the Stalker can shoot the Marauder.
Certain SC2 units overkill. Units that have a travel-time on their attacks, for example. Colossi and Banshees are the ones I can name off the top of my head. Marauders, Stalkers, and Hydralisks, Vikings, BCs, etc might overkill as well.
You could have tested this by simply playing an AI game, taking 3 Colossi, marching to your opponent's base, and seeing if all 3 fired at once when ordered to kill a worker. Instead, you spout off blatantly incorrect facts, like "SC2 units don't overkill!".
Spout all the "OMGZ U DON'T KNOW ABOUT SC2" drivel that you want. At least I don't state blatant, disprovable falsities.
On April 30 2010 15:31 Bwenjarin Raffrack wrote:On April 30 2010 13:57 madcow305 wrote:
But you, being the old, bitter SC1 player you are, knew perfectly that a Bulldog didn't have nearly the micro required of a warpgate/robo push, so you deliberately picked an SC1 example with tons of micro, to somehow negate my argument that SC2 has high micro requirements. If you want to compare lategame battles, then sure, lets compare lategame battles between SC2 and SC1. Just first admit that a Bulldog from SC1 requires less micro than an SC2 Warpgate/Robo push first. If you don't believe this, then give me the micro requirements for a Toss doing a Bulldog against a Siege-Expand Terran, and explain to me why it requires more micro than SC2 warpgate/robo push. They're both early mid-game timing attacks made by Protoss against Terran. I chose the Bulldog specifically because it mimics the SC2 early warp-gate/robo timing attack
Definitely a false dichotomy. He doesn't really have to admit anything which has absolutely nothing to do with his point, the point of the OP, and the point of the thread, and lording something irrelevant and contrived over him as if it proves anything would be pointless.
The crux of the OP's argument is that small SC1 game bugs like Muta stacking and moving-shot were wholly representative of the game's Micro, and since SC2 doesn't have these exact same bugs, there is no Micro in SC2. This is wrong, simply because we haven't discovered SC2's game engine bugs, and even without them, there's still a huge amount of micro involved in battles due to each race having more viable spellcasters, and more armor-type bonus damage.
And here a strawman. It's easy to argue against a five word title when it was intentionally meant to be sensationalist ("What do you mean SC2 has no micro?! I can cast force fields and blink! There's yer micro"). But what if the OP meant that the micro present in SC2 is a
subset of the micro available in BW? Arguing to prove that there is indeed micro in SC2 does nothing to answer the question of why trying to diversify the types of micro in SC2 would be a bad thing. I appreciate the effort that you've put into your posts, but I don't think they're answering the right questions.
The guy made a claim: that early game PvT timing attacks in SC1 had way more micro involved than the same timing attacks in SC2. I asked him to name some timing attacks that fit this profile, because I already gave the Bulldog example. Instead of taking the example I gave of two PvT timing attacks by Protoss from SC1 and SC2 and proving my points wrong, the guy goes off on a tangent about lategame PvT, without addressing my point. Hence why I asked him to admit that my point about early-game PvT in SC2 being more micro-intensive than SC1 is correct, before I go on to debate lategame PvT with him.
It may not have anything to do with the OP, but neither does the argument about the definition of skill that's been going on for the past two pages. Why aren't you yelling at those people?
The OP didn't argue that micro in SC2 is a subset of micro in SC1. He simply lamented the non-existence of Move-Shoot, and blamed Dustin Browder for it.
And I've already stated the answer to everyone's question about SC2 micro earlier: the nostalgic micro tricks we adore from SC1 were products of the game engine's bugs.
Was Move-Shoot described in the SC1 manual? Nope. They told you how to build buildings, how to collect minerals, how to make units, but they didn't explain Move-Shoot, or Muta stacking, or Hold Lurker. Why? Because the game designers never planned for it to be a part of the game. It was a random product of the game engine's coding.
Why is this relevant to SC2? Well, let me ask, how long did it take people to discover and streamline Move-Shoot? A year or two after BW was released? What about Muta Stacking? Mid 2004? I'm not clear on the exact dates, but the point is, these Micro tricks we're all up in arms about weren't even discovered until
years after the game was released. The reason for such a late discovery was because people had to fiddle around doing
random bullshit with units for years to discover SC:BW's game engine quirks. And yes, it really was random bullshit. Who would ever think to group a bunch of Mutas with an Overlord?
So, we've had Beta for a month or two. Can we stop lamenting the lack of game engine quirks that took years for people in SC:BW to figure out?
Like I said in one of my previous posts, maybe in SC2, if you group your Hellions with an Ebay, they gain the ability to animation cancel and move-shoot like Vultures in SC1. Who the fuk knows?
Your last questions have already been answered, stop repeating them. Before BW, we weren't looking for the kind of micro that it introduced. Now we are because we have seen what people can do in BW.
Blizzard should have watched and learned from BW, not been like "oops, it seems that the unintentional glithces in BW made for a flourishing and interresting pro-scene. Oh well, they were unintentional, so I guess we have to remove them in the sequel anyway"
People have been looking for interresting micro, and none have been found. People's concerns are justified.
Your bulldog argument is invalid because Bulldog is a cheese and a warpgate/robo push is not. You said that the protoss had collossi that he had to micro against the terran, so why on earth would you compare a build that has collossi and immortals to an all in early game cheese like bulldog?
At least compare it to an SCBW scenario where the toss also has a midgame army, geez. A protoss that has taken his third and is defending from a terran timing push would be a more fair comparison.
Also, you coming up with all the stuff that the toss has to do doesn't really prove anything either since it doesn't take into account how hard each individual micro is to do. You mostly described target firing and positioning sentries and using abilities. while in SC1 there are dozens of other aspects other than what units targets what. Protoss push breaking micro for example is a scinece all by itself. getting a good flank is not enough, you have to move your zealots the right way, if there are well-placed mines you have to make sure that a few zealots charges in to clear them. You may or may not have a reaver in a shuttle left from something you did earlier, and the theory for getting the max out of shuttle/reaver against terran alone is ridiculously complex. There are many little things like that that you forgot to mention.
EPT
