|
I'm not sure you have much of an understanding of what is going on here. It should be obvious that the level in SC2 increases very rapidly compared other games in their first few months. That alone should put an end to the whole use free time to get better argument. It's really kills any discussion to say people shouldn't say anything but instead practice more.
I have a considerable understanding of what's going on. Yes, people improve better at SC2 than they did at BW. I don't contest that fact but I do contest the fact that it's somehow a bad thing. If these players are "pros" they should be able to put that "extra bit of awesome" to use somewhere else in the game. Instead, what we're getting are a lot of players just complaining how new players are able to play at a much higher level. To be quite honest, it sounds like sour grapes, or wounded pride. All the years of practicing clunky mechanics to the point where it requires no thought are suddenly undermined by the fact that *gasp* someone recognized the game can be made to have more sensible game play.
I don't see how this "kills the use free time to get better" argument, either. If you spend less time staring at your base you have more time to position your units, micro them in combat, attack at multiple locations simultaneously. There's only so much a person can do at one time. So you can have the old BW style of a balance of micro/macro taking up your time or you can have the SC2 style where micro and tactics (potentially) have more importance than macro. I think the latter is far more interesting.
Any new game will inspire creativity in the earlier periods. This guaranteed. The main argument is that once creativity is spotted it is doable for other top players to copy this creativity rapidly. Simply following TLO/Jinro and the oGs guys on ladder it is amazing how when someone on the Korean ladder introduces a new strategy that works how he will be playing against it the next day.
I don't see how this is any different than it was in Brood War. Perhaps you could explain? Are you saying that it's simply easy to counter new strats because of the way units are made to counter certain things, or because you can get replays so easily, or because it's just an easier game over all?
Is this a joke? Every single guy in the top of SC2 that has a BW background will tell you BW was a tougher game. There is no need to ridicule them for this at all. Of course people will not comment on how they love how X makes units in SC2 because everybody makes the same amount of units, that is the whole point. If you followed any BW at all you will know how indeed people watching comment on amazing macro constantly.
The only thing I said is that saying it's tougher because there was a lack of MBS, automining, etc. is silly. It was not that big a deal. I have indeed watched (and played) a lot of BW. I didn't say people don't comment on macro - I said they don't go out to watch a match specifically for the excitement of watching macro - and they don't, unless they want info for practicing their own. When you think of the most bad-ass games out there, it's almost always the micro and tactics that are most exciting - and SC2 doesn't detract from that at all.
By now I'm starting to come across as some BW groupie but in fact I love SC2 and think it's an awesome game. It's not going to change and everybody has to accept this. All I am doing here is make sure that all the correct information is provided because so much crap is being spread that it becomes difficult for people to educate themselves properly.
I don't think you're a BW groupie; but just because people don't agree with your views doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about with regard to BW - they just have a different opinion. As stated, I've played BW for over 10 years - to the point where I'm pretty sure it was unhealthy. I've watched the game change over the years, seen virtually every major tournament, watched pros come and go, blah, blah, blah. I "get" it. I just don't agree that SC2 is somehow "lacking" simply because MBS, automining and others are involved. Once anyone got to the point where macro was second nature, it literally took 5 seconds to hit a key to return to base, spam some produciton, move an SCV and then hotkey your ass back to a battle. Not a big deal in my opinion, and entirely overstated by the more vocal pros out there.
|
On October 07 2010 02:12 koreasilver wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 01:57 attackfighter wrote:On October 07 2010 01:51 Hawk wrote:On October 07 2010 01:43 attackfighter wrote:
SC2 just has very little focus on micro (or macro, but I was never a huge fan of macro...) and too much emphasis is placed on build orders. How is the emphasis on BOs any different than BW? Some shit works better than others. Same in both games. If you are building in complete disregard to what your opponent is doing, you get fucked--same in both games. Do you not get punished in BW if you pump nothing but lings and your T opponent sees it and uses bats?? And little focus on micro or macro, why do people keep bringing this up?? There's a ton of focus on macro. Try not injecting lavre all game, or not using chrono boosts. Or stick to gates instead of warps. Or micro for that matter, get a mirror match and A-move an identical amount of units against an opponent who does basic micro. 12 muta vs 12 muta, micro wins that battle every time. This argument constantly gets brought up by so many people and it's just flat out stupid. No your argument is stupid. For the most part, macro and micro are so easy at a pro level that everyone should be performing equally in those areas - this makes build orders more important since there isn't much else a top player can do to deviate from his opponent. His point isn't stupid at all. During the GSL S1 you were able to clearly see that some people were much better at macro. The fact that you can put multiple buildings under the same hotkey hasn't changed the fact that the people with better awareness and macro "rhythm" had better production efficiency. Everyone was not performing equally, and various games were won and lost because of better or worse ( gasp) macro. For micro, do we even have to bring up Tester's force field usage that were clearly better than some other Protoss players? There were many large engagements that were won or lost due to micro ability as well.
It has been said before but I'll say it again pointing at a single tournament very early in the life of this game to somehow think you can prove or disprove something about how the game will look in the long run is simply wrong. No matter which theory is right there is no way people will play equal styles in the very first large tournament.
|
On October 07 2010 02:06 DJEtterStyle wrote:
NTT makes some good points, but he's too upset to make them well. The major issue with SC2 is one that exists in any RTS: players can make stupid decisions and still win.
It's a question of human psychology. Most players don't go into a game saying, "I'm going to start with a flexible build, scout, and adapt my play." Instead, they blindly execute a build order and hope for the best. We've all lost games from play that made no logical sense whatsoever, situations in which your opponent was not reacting properly to anything he scouted and just blindly making units. The difference was that, in Brood War, superior mechanics could save you from that loss; you could claw your way back into the game. In SC2, though, you just lose; the game mechanics are so simple that the first setback puts you on a slippery slope from which you can never recover.
I do agree the mechanics changed the ability to come back from a hole, or the ability to win despite leaky gameplay, but definitely not to the extent that you feel. Come from behind wins weren't that easy/didn't happen that frequently in BW and it's certainly not THAT hard in SC2.
If anything, it's late game comebacks that are changed. A crappy player that happened to get a random lead in the game would typically forget to have his probes mining on his third or fourth expo in BW. Maybe they'd forget a key upgrade for like Obs speed and lose a contain because of that. Automine is a very minor thing in most games, but there, it's the difference between an economy stagnating and truckin along. Forget to do a critical upgrade?? CHROOOONOOOOO.
So yes, some leaks are patched in that regard, but the good kid who is behind still has access to those same things. He can focus less on macro and more on very disciplined unit control (the key to come back wins in both BW and SC2). Slightly different, but at the heart of the issue, not really too much different
|
On October 07 2010 02:14 DueleR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:08 Herculix wrote:
requesting a replay of NTT able to micro multiple battles in different areas of the map while expanding and macroing without missing a beat. since everything is such low APM he should be able to handle it no problem right? only one is necessary. i noticed he's in the uber-league for EU with dimaga, naniwa etc. so someone should have a replay. i assume he plays well if he's in that league. There are plenty of pre-patch NTT reps on sites like sc2rep.com, just put his name in the search box.
well, i wanted them to be in this thread so it could be made aware to everyone who's interested what this guy's skill level is. i remember seeing like 1 game of him but idr how he plays.
so, i found the replay. it was a pretty awesome ga,e 40 minutes long vs socke. ironically NTT cries about how he is limited in options, socke tells him he can go BCs, NTT goes BCs and... well i won't spoil it. but here it is.
http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/show/id/1051
|
On October 07 2010 02:20 attackfighter wrote:
I played D- on iccup but even there I had to use more micro than I do in SC2. Protoss still had to hit 2a and 3a as well. Terran could not just attack move against zerg, lurkers, dark swarm, scourge and the amount of irradiates you had to do made that MU extremely micro taxing. Zerg was probably the hardest race to micro, since you had tons of control groups and you needed good surrounds and timing in order to beat any decent opponent.
And who's to say SC2 won't be just as hard in a few years? You mention dark swarm but that's endgame. You can't just 1a against Zerg at the moment either with bio, any decent Zerg will have infestors and wreck your world. Zerg are still the most mechanically demanding race in SC2 as well, so....I'm not sure what your point is. More micro is required? Give SC2 a year, more micro/macro will be required than now. Heck, 4gate isn't even scary anymore. A few months ago it was feared.
Look at top pros, like fruit seller and hope torture: they both performed micro and macro tasks fairly optimally, and so their games were decided more by their scouting and build orders/
FruitDealer outplayed HopeTorture pure and simple. There were no "BO victories" or anything of the sort. FruitDealer stomped all over anything HopeTorture tried to do (especially drops), and simply outplayed him.
|
On October 07 2010 02:24 attackfighter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:12 koreasilver wrote:On October 07 2010 01:57 attackfighter wrote:On October 07 2010 01:51 Hawk wrote:On October 07 2010 01:43 attackfighter wrote:
SC2 just has very little focus on micro (or macro, but I was never a huge fan of macro...) and too much emphasis is placed on build orders. How is the emphasis on BOs any different than BW? Some shit works better than others. Same in both games. If you are building in complete disregard to what your opponent is doing, you get fucked--same in both games. Do you not get punished in BW if you pump nothing but lings and your T opponent sees it and uses bats?? And little focus on micro or macro, why do people keep bringing this up?? There's a ton of focus on macro. Try not injecting lavre all game, or not using chrono boosts. Or stick to gates instead of warps. Or micro for that matter, get a mirror match and A-move an identical amount of units against an opponent who does basic micro. 12 muta vs 12 muta, micro wins that battle every time. This argument constantly gets brought up by so many people and it's just flat out stupid. No your argument is stupid. For the most part, macro and micro are so easy at a pro level that everyone should be performing equally in those areas - this makes build orders more important since there isn't much else a top player can do to deviate from his opponent. His point isn't stupid at all. During the GSL S1 you were able to clearly see that some people were much better at macro. The fact that you can put multiple buildings under the same hotkey hasn't changed the fact that the people with better awareness and macro "rhythm" had better production efficiency. Everyone was not performing equally, and various games were won and lost because of better or worse ( gasp) macro. For micro, do we even have to bring up Tester's force field usage that were clearly better than some other Protoss players? There were many large engagements that were won or lost due to micro ability as well. There were tons of shitty pros at GSL (and all other tournaments) though. Look at top pros, like fruit seller and hope torture: they both performed micro and macro tasks fairly optimally, and so their games were decided more by their scouting and build orders/
Gasp! Just like it was in Brood War!
|
I cannot understand why many BW (or former BW) players cant accept the fact that BW might not be the best game ever. I realise that not everyone is like this, but still.
Many people will just say "BW was harder" or "BW had better units etc" without realising that it is only their own opinion.
Everyone is trying to argue about what the better game is, when you cant. You can say which game YOU prefer, or which game YOU believe is the hardest one, but you cant just state it as fact and end there.
Also i feel it to be kinda silly that 2months into SC2 people are already saying that it is harder/isnt harder than BW. BW has been there for 12 years, lets see what SC2 is like in 12 years, probably isnt even the same game. In 12 years there will probably be complex strategies and way different BOs than today.
Honestly it's like watching the first 10 mins of Ironman 2 and then just saying that it's worse than the first one.
People have played BW for like 10 years, obviously they are gonna claim that it was the hardest game in the world, even if it wasnt. Same thing is gonna happen in 10 years with SC2, people are gonna say that it was really hard, way harder than SC3 (and way better), even though it might not be.
People just need to realise that there is no right or wrong in this debate. BW is not harder than SC2. SC2 is not harder than BW.
|
It has been said before but I'll say it again pointing at a single tournament very early in the life of this game to somehow think you can prove or disprove something about how the game will look in the long run is simply wrong. No matter which theory is right there is no way people will play equal styles in the very first large tournament.
Double sided.
No one can say that what people are doing now will have no room for uniqueness later on. You need to give the game time and see how it develops before ultimately conceding that it will never change.
|
On October 07 2010 02:28 Rinsho wrote:Show nested quote +Look at top pros, like fruit seller and hope torture: they both performed micro and macro tasks fairly optimally, and so their games were decided more by their scouting and build orders/ FruitDealer outplayed HopeTorture pure and simple. There were no "BO victories" or anything of the sort. FruitDealer stomped all over anything HopeTorture tried to do (especially drops), and simply outplayed him.
exactly.
hell the only BO victory was susposed to be the scrap station game in favor of hopetorture.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 07 2010 02:28 Rinsho wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:20 attackfighter wrote:
I played D- on iccup but even there I had to use more micro than I do in SC2. Protoss still had to hit 2a and 3a as well. Terran could not just attack move against zerg, lurkers, dark swarm, scourge and the amount of irradiates you had to do made that MU extremely micro taxing. Zerg was probably the hardest race to micro, since you had tons of control groups and you needed good surrounds and timing in order to beat any decent opponent. And who's to say SC2 won't be just as hard in a few years? You mention dark swarm but that's endgame. You can't just 1a against Zerg at the moment either with bio, any decent Zerg will have infestors and wreck your world. Zerg are still the most mechanically demanding race in SC2 as well, so....I'm not sure what your point is. More micro is required? Give SC2 a year, more micro/macro will be required than now. Heck, 4gate isn't even scary anymore. A few months ago it was feared.
You couldn't attack move mid game either cause of lurkers.
I'm 1400 diamond and I attack move all the time, and that's with terran (the most harrassment based race). Look at protoss for example, they barely even have a choice, unless they're cheesing or something they're going to get collusus/HT and 1a+storm all game. Zerg just turtles with mutalisks and then attack moves with ultras at the end*.
*well to be fair they might split their force in two in order to surround better
FruitDealer outplayed HopeTorture pure and simple. There were no "BO victories" or anything of the sort. FruitDealer stomped all over anything HopeTorture tried to do (especially drops), and simply outplayed him.
ever wonder why the drops didn't work? cause FD's build was prepared for them. he didn't pull off insane micro or macro to win, he just scouted and reacted appropriately
|
On October 07 2010 02:25 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:12 koreasilver wrote:On October 07 2010 01:57 attackfighter wrote:On October 07 2010 01:51 Hawk wrote:On October 07 2010 01:43 attackfighter wrote:
SC2 just has very little focus on micro (or macro, but I was never a huge fan of macro...) and too much emphasis is placed on build orders. How is the emphasis on BOs any different than BW? Some shit works better than others. Same in both games. If you are building in complete disregard to what your opponent is doing, you get fucked--same in both games. Do you not get punished in BW if you pump nothing but lings and your T opponent sees it and uses bats?? And little focus on micro or macro, why do people keep bringing this up?? There's a ton of focus on macro. Try not injecting lavre all game, or not using chrono boosts. Or stick to gates instead of warps. Or micro for that matter, get a mirror match and A-move an identical amount of units against an opponent who does basic micro. 12 muta vs 12 muta, micro wins that battle every time. This argument constantly gets brought up by so many people and it's just flat out stupid. No your argument is stupid. For the most part, macro and micro are so easy at a pro level that everyone should be performing equally in those areas - this makes build orders more important since there isn't much else a top player can do to deviate from his opponent. His point isn't stupid at all. During the GSL S1 you were able to clearly see that some people were much better at macro. The fact that you can put multiple buildings under the same hotkey hasn't changed the fact that the people with better awareness and macro "rhythm" had better production efficiency. Everyone was not performing equally, and various games were won and lost because of better or worse ( gasp) macro. For micro, do we even have to bring up Tester's force field usage that were clearly better than some other Protoss players? There were many large engagements that were won or lost due to micro ability as well. It has been said before but I'll say it again pointing at a single tournament very early in the life of this game to somehow think you can prove or disprove something about how the game will look in the long run is simply wrong. No matter which theory is right there is no way people will play equal styles in the very first large tournament.
I agree, but even if we look at the last few years of BW where the great majority of players will play in the style that is popular at the time, there's always people that push it further and better than their contemporaries. SC2 doesn't even have its expansions out and it hasn't even been out for a year, and even with the "easier" micro and macro, there's a lot of times where splitting your units into multiple hotkeys instead of simply putting every damned thing in one hotkey is going to allow you to micro better.
When I read about some D- guy from iCCup claiming that the game is easier because you can just put all your shit in "1" and attack move, it just boggles my mind because in midgame and lategame engagements you will get slaughtered in various situations if you do so. Macro isn't really that easy either. Of course being able to set a different rally point for my drones makes things A LOT cleaner but still, making sure I'm not neglecting my larva injects and managing my creep spread sufficiently while not losing focus of my units and minimap isn't really that easy. Some aspects of management may have become simpler but there's still a lot of things to do, both old and new, that will allow the better player to play better while being confined to the same interface as everyone else.
|
I understand that this person was well known in Brood War and probably for good reasons but...
We show our maturity (or lack of it) in the way we react to issues we have trouble with.
I understand their are some things this person may or may not like about this new SC2 game (emphasis on game) but really the way he reacted is just about as fucking immature as you can get. If you got problems then talk about them, there is no need to talk down to a community that you are (apparently) trying to communicate with. That first letter or post or w/e was just fucking pathetic, and yea at that point I dont really give a shit who the guy is or what he's done because he reacts just like a juvenile would. No respect for this person or what he has to say.
My .02c If you want to discuss issues grow up and do it like an adult.
|
On October 07 2010 02:03 Mazer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 01:59 LostDevil wrote:One last thing I will say about SC2 vs Broodwar is that I know of a female on the ladder who has 50 max apm in a game (this is not exaggerated) and does the same "timing push" every game regardless of the opponents race and is 1700. This is what is not acceptable to, what you forumers call, "old time broodwar elitists". You realize people could make it to C+ by just 6-pooling people on Iccup right? I guess that makes BW a bad game too?
6 pool? you dont know what you are talking about. There was a guy that wanted to 5pool to see how high he would get and he didnt get past D plus...
|
On October 07 2010 02:39 HeadhunteR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:03 Mazer wrote:On October 07 2010 01:59 LostDevil wrote:One last thing I will say about SC2 vs Broodwar is that I know of a female on the ladder who has 50 max apm in a game (this is not exaggerated) and does the same "timing push" every game regardless of the opponents race and is 1700. This is what is not acceptable to, what you forumers call, "old time broodwar elitists". You realize people could make it to C+ by just 6-pooling people on Iccup right? I guess that makes BW a bad game too? 6 pool? you dont know what you are talking about. There was a guy that wanted to 5pool to see how high he would get and he didnt get past D plus...
I'm surprised he was even a solid D. As a D/D- I almost never lost to early game cheese...
|
Did this guy ever get any result in an important sc2 tournament? If not he is not worth the attention in the sc2 community tbh.
|
All I have to say is if the game is so damned easy where was NTT at the GSL finals versus Cool?
|
Eccocentric and rosy retrspection biases much?
Fact is bw players cant let go of the past , if sc2 is better game or not is a matter of preference and till the whole trilogy is complete you cant simply compare the games.
quit bitching and compare , all the time he just raging quited just like the whole im gonna switch races argument with zerg players and they just won the whole gsl tournament ;p
|
On October 07 2010 02:36 attackfighter wrote:
You couldn't attack move mid game either cause of lurkers.
I'm 1400 diamond and I attack move all the time, and that's with terran (the most harrassment based race). Look at protoss for example, they barely even have a choice, unless they're cheesing or something they're going to get collusus/HT and 1a+storm all game. Zerg just turtles with mutalisks and then attack moves with ultras at the end*.
*well to be fair they might split their force in two in order to surround better
You can't a-move now either mid-game or late because of infestors. Fungal tears bio ball apart. Or you'll get owned by burrowed banelings, or fungal+baneling, or just speed banelings.
ever wonder why the drops didn't work? cause FD's build was prepared for them. he didn't pull off insane micro or macro to win, he just scouted and reacted appropriately
Wait, so you're saying catching every. single. drop. isn't a skill? You're saying that scouting and reacting appropriately isn't a skill? Micro and macro aren't the only two skill sets for an RTS pro-gamer, but just to touch on macro - FruitDealer has extremely good macro, his economy/army management was in a league of its own during the GSL. Did you even watch the GSL?
|
On October 07 2010 01:45 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 01:32 Zocat wrote:Edit: ok you answered most of the questions in your other post. I am such a slow typer  I have a question about the way he played - might be slightly offtopic. I looked it up and back then replays weren't available (and a lot of players mentioned it in this thread already^^). I just assume that streaming & VODs while playing didnt exist that much as it does today. Do you think that such a unique playstyle can be found today? Today with replays - when a player uses a unique and successful playstyle - everyone gets their replays and analyzes the crap out of them. The masses of SC2 players will try to adapt those strategies in normal bnet agmes- even the good (pro) players might try to copy that. And because the information is so wildely available they succeed in copying. Then the opponents start to lose to this strategy - and analyze the replays to find weaknesses. And they can tell their practice partners to play "the build" (as it is freely available). Are those "unique" styles viable in SC2? For longer than the tournament in which they are introduced? Anything is possible but it is definitely a lot harder. When NTT was in his prime replays were literally just introduced (BW went a long time without replays) with no vods or anything existing. People simply had no footage of top players and thus you could only copy those you played with directly and you weren't even able to look up why you lost to a certain style. Though style and uniqueness is generally a good thing, a game doesn't need to have this much diversity to do well in esports (but it would be a nice bonus). Replays definitely hurt creativity and uniqueness but that doesn't mean that the benefits they introduced didn't outweigh the cons. I don't know if SC2 will also have players who have their own style in the long run. Though the settings make it harder it shouldn't doesn't mean it is impossible. There are definitely styles out there currently but we are still very early in the life of this game so time will have to tell if these players can keep this up. Either way watching top players perform top strategies is always awesome anyways. BW doesn't have nearly as much variety as it had in 1999 but that doesn't say much as watching BW players in 2010 is still really great and I hope and think the same will go for SC2.
I think Nazgul summed it up pretty well so I can only add to one of his points in that there is players with their own style already. None more so than the Peruvian, CatZ.
That guy has one of the most unique and interesting Zerg styles of play out there. Is he a world beater winning GSL, IEM, and MLG? No. But he is doing very well with a style that is all his own. The guy will 7 pool in ZvP, you will know he is doing it, and most people still lose. Why? CatZ has figured out that opening and every conceivable follow up that he knows exactly every move to make when. He is good at counting opponent workers and using his last couple Zerglings to snipe JUST enough so he ends up ahead on workers. There's also his now sort fo well known Proxy Infestor Pit into double fungal on all of an opponents mineral lines. Who does that? CatZ does all the time, most notably against LZ at MLG lol........
There will be styles, but I think unlike BW they will only show AFTER people really break down and 90% figure out the game. Except for CatZ, he is a rare breed.
|
On October 07 2010 02:45 Rinsho wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 02:36 attackfighter wrote:
You couldn't attack move mid game either cause of lurkers.
I'm 1400 diamond and I attack move all the time, and that's with terran (the most harrassment based race). Look at protoss for example, they barely even have a choice, unless they're cheesing or something they're going to get collusus/HT and 1a+storm all game. Zerg just turtles with mutalisks and then attack moves with ultras at the end*.
*well to be fair they might split their force in two in order to surround better You can't a-move now either mid-game or late because of infestors. Fungal tears bio ball apart. Or you'll get owned by burrowed banelings, or fungal+baneling, or just speed banelings. Show nested quote +
ever wonder why the drops didn't work? cause FD's build was prepared for them. he didn't pull off insane micro or macro to win, he just scouted and reacted appropriately
Wait, so you're saying catching every. single. drop. isn't a skill? You're saying that scouting and reacting appropriately isn't a skill? Micro and macro aren't the only two skill sets for an RTS pro-gamer, but just to touch on macro - FruitDealer has extremely good macro, his economy/army management was in a league of its own during the GSL. Did you even watch the GSL?
So what do they do instead of attack moving? Turtle? the most micro I see is when the terran kites... asides from that all battles seem to revolve around attack move + spell spam
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
