• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 02:54
CEST 08:54
KST 15:54
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation5$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced4Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles5[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66
StarCraft 2
General
The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing
Tourneys
$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
i aint gon lie to u bruh... ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall SC uni coach streams logging into betting site
Tourneys
[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Earn Rewards for Every Prediction in the Game Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 609 users

[D] What SC2 is missing? - Page 21

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 70 Next
teekesselchen
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Germany886 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-16 12:51:21
April 16 2011 12:47 GMT
#401
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.





How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.

What also follows out of this: Spread out match leads to more importance of single actions and single units. A 3-Base situation won't benefit DT or HT drops for example, so people just focuss on defending because spreading further won't work out well as there is no cost efficient defense. Also, we already know those graphs, more than 3 base are pretty useless in SC2 anyways.
When they were introduced, he made a witticism, hoping to be liked. She laughed extremely hard, hoping to be liked. Then each drove home alone, staring straight ahead, with the very same twist to their faces.
Hypatio
Profile Joined September 2010
549 Posts
April 16 2011 12:47 GMT
#402
The problem with SC2 is that unit composition always trumps micro. Whether or not you win is based on tipping point mechanics between DPS and unit survivability.
Numy
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
South Africa35471 Posts
April 16 2011 12:49 GMT
#403
On April 16 2011 21:43 Elefanto wrote:

But the community clearly doesn't want this. If you read one of the balance threads, live-reports etc. things that get whined about are AOE unit.
Colossus, Templar and Tanks for instance. And they all got nerfed. Yet there are still so many whines about them.


I don't think you can really say this. Colossus behave like mobile tanks without setup times. I can fully understand why people whine about them. Templar did have a problem. Warp in storm was a silly dynamic. Tanks I can't say much, not sure why they got nerfed.

Anyway some of the whine about these units were logical. Units that control space should have downsides, these 2 did not have downsides until recently.
teekesselchen
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Germany886 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-16 12:54:08
April 16 2011 12:52 GMT
#404
On April 16 2011 21:49 Numy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:43 Elefanto wrote:

But the community clearly doesn't want this. If you read one of the balance threads, live-reports etc. things that get whined about are AOE unit.
Colossus, Templar and Tanks for instance. And they all got nerfed. Yet there are still so many whines about them.


I don't think you can really say this. Colossus behave like mobile tanks without setup times. I can fully understand why people whine about them. Templar did have a problem. Warp in storm was a silly dynamic. Tanks I can't say much, not sure why they got nerfed.

Anyway some of the whine about these units were logical. Units that control space should have downsides, these 2 did not have downsides until recently.


Well Reavers behaved so as well, but they were ridiculously slow so they needed dropships, which led to no setup time but extreeeemely cool micro battles!
Colossi are just Dropship and Reaver combined -> few micro requirement left. It's kinda sad...

What blizzard does: If a unit deals a lot of damage, they nerf the damage.
What they should do to reach a broodwar-situation: They should make it require a lot of micro to deal that damage, but be less efficient with weak micro.

For example Colossi: Removing Colossi and bringing in Reavers again -> Same damage potential, but a harder micro requirements to deal it.
When they were introduced, he made a witticism, hoping to be liked. She laughed extremely hard, hoping to be liked. Then each drove home alone, staring straight ahead, with the very same twist to their faces.
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
April 16 2011 12:52 GMT
#405
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.


You said that SC2 micro looked boring and was unspectacular. I posted a video of marine micro avoiding baneling splash, much like that Nada video where he avoid lurker splash by marine micro. You reply by explaining how banelings and lurkers differ in use? What does that have to do with anything?
teekesselchen
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Germany886 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-16 12:57:46
April 16 2011 12:56 GMT
#406
On April 16 2011 21:52 karpo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.


You said that SC2 micro looked boring and was unspectacular. I posted a video of marine micro avoiding baneling splash, much like that Nada video where he avoid lurker splash by marine micro. You reply by explaining how banelings and lurkers differ in use? What does that have to do with anything?


1. There are way less battles leading to that kind of interesting micro in SC2, with some baneling battles beeing an exeption much rather. Vulture vs Dragoons got completely removed for example and was kinda awesome, and Hellions vs Lings is way less spectacular and easier to micro than Vulture vs Lings.
2. Imo Lurkers were much harder to micro than banelings, and also harder to counter with micro
3. I just said that Banelings are no suitable replacement for Lurkers, because Lurkers had more than just that micro aspect, but also a game-designing aspect which Banelings totally miss.
When they were introduced, he made a witticism, hoping to be liked. She laughed extremely hard, hoping to be liked. Then each drove home alone, staring straight ahead, with the very same twist to their faces.
hugman
Profile Joined June 2009
Sweden4644 Posts
April 16 2011 12:57 GMT
#407
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I think the unit clumping has a lot to do with why battles in SC2 aren't as fun to watch. You get these huge balls of units that just annihilate eachother. When the units are more spread out the battles take longer, terrain matters more and there's more time to adapt to the battle.
Faze.
Profile Joined November 2010
Canada285 Posts
April 16 2011 13:00 GMT
#408
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.

What also follows out of this: Spread out match leads to more importance of single actions and single units. A 3-Base situation won't benefit DT or HT drops for example, so people just focuss on defending because spreading further won't work out well as there is no cost efficient defense. Also, we already know those graphs, more than 3 base are pretty useless in SC2 anyways.


And this is why some people refuse to give SC2 time to evolve.

Let me tell you something, the same way you just did, but for the sake of all this great thread, I'll do it the other way around.
Lurkers are boring compared to banelings because they do exactly what anyone would think of doing with them : burrow them at your base to defend or try to bring them offensively and use them kind of like siege tanks to make your main army stronger. While banelings not only can they blow shit up, but you can burrow them at random place to kill a good amount of units, something that cant be done with lurkers because once they attack, the enemy knows where they are and they're now semi-useless. Banelings can also be used to burst a building down very quickly to open a path for your main forces. Banelings are also great to use with other ground units to do a great surround, which lurkers cant do. Another things you can do with banelings that you can't do with lurker is to bomb drop them on your opponent's army with your main forces are fighting.

I just did what you did. Say good things about something I like and totally put down something I don't like just to make my personal preference look even better, all in a masterful display of ignorance about the things I dislike.

We're all equally stupid in this endless argument.
D:
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
April 16 2011 13:01 GMT
#409
On April 16 2011 21:56 teekesselchen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:52 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.


You said that SC2 micro looked boring and was unspectacular. I posted a video of marine micro avoiding baneling splash, much like that Nada video where he avoid lurker splash by marine micro. You reply by explaining how banelings and lurkers differ in use? What does that have to do with anything?


1. There are way less battles leading to that kind of interesting micro in SC2, with some baneling battles beeing an exeption much rather
2. Imo Lurkers were much harder to micro than banelings, and also harder to counter with micro
3. I just said that Banelings are no suitable replacement for Lurkers, because Lurkers had more than just that micro aspect, but also a game-designing aspect which Banelings totally miss.


There's less battles leading to that micro CURRENTLY. Cause not many players are able to do it, noone had seen it before Marineking. Maybe well see more of that kind of micro further down the road. I've seen impressive marine/blink stalker/DT/Banshee/Muta micro in SC2 so far, i expect it to develop further in the future.


StarStruck
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
25339 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-04-16 13:12:36
April 16 2011 13:06 GMT
#410
...

If you ask anyone who has seen him play from the beginning they would tell you the same fucking thing. There is no argument and your opinion is baseless. The facts are in his play and other obligations. They are all there. It isn't arguable.

Geoff the "Incontrol" freak Robinson did make a few comments regarding NaDa's play in the NASL a few days ago when he was up against dde. Geoff praised NaDa for his spectacular mechanics (keeping his minerals below 200-300). He showed great macro, but hell he made so many mistakes with his micro and unit control he could have lost that game at least 5 times. -_- You can bark and play the 'opinion' card all you want, but the fact of the matter is he isn't even close to playing like his former self. You know what they called him before Genius Terran? TORNADO Terran because the guy used to be everywhere at once fucking your shit up. (EDIT: Fun fact, before players started coining the Protoss Death Ball in SC2 it was used to describe Terran in BW). NaDa started it. You look at the minimap and his units movement look like a hurricane. He is the grand master of SK Terran. The fucker perfected it.

With that said, this thread is about improving SC2 game play. That is what you should take away from it, so take off your beer goggles and stop trying to turn it into something different.

The fact you trying to attack players who have YEARS of experience playing RTS games should make you step back for a second and think about what they have to say.

karpo, the same could be said about Hasuob's Void Rays at the LAN in Italy. Then you got to ask yourself, how do these units effect the game flow and map control?
Telex
Profile Joined August 2010
United States1 Post
April 16 2011 13:08 GMT
#411
Nice OP, but I think a fundamental problem is that the opening poster assumes familiarity and skill with BW when analyzing BW's spectator appeal. If a B+ ICCup player watches a huge battle, than yeah, they're going to be amazed at unit control and micro because they know how hard it is. A person who has barely played BW will not. Further, if someone who watched a BW match decides they want to play because it looks fun, they will most likely be driven off by the very mechanics you praise as being so conducive to the spectator experience.

Like you, I hope that future patches/expansions/metagame shifts encourage positional play and a better flow. But while BW did (and does) have awesome aspects for the skilled player and skilled spectator, it is not built to expand the popularity of eSport Starcraft with today's audience. SC2 has that initial wow factor, and has easy accessibility - which is probably why it is taking off so well right now.
teekesselchen
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Germany886 Posts
April 16 2011 13:11 GMT
#412
On April 16 2011 22:00 Faze. wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.

What also follows out of this: Spread out match leads to more importance of single actions and single units. A 3-Base situation won't benefit DT or HT drops for example, so people just focuss on defending because spreading further won't work out well as there is no cost efficient defense. Also, we already know those graphs, more than 3 base are pretty useless in SC2 anyways.


And this is why some people refuse to give SC2 time to evolve.

Let me tell you something, the same way you just did, but for the sake of all this great thread, I'll do it the other way around.
Lurkers are boring compared to banelings because they do exactly what anyone would think of doing with them : burrow them at your base to defend or try to bring them offensively and use them kind of like siege tanks to make your main army stronger. While banelings not only can they blow shit up, but you can burrow them at random place to kill a good amount of units, something that cant be done with lurkers because once they attack, the enemy knows where they are and they're now semi-useless. Banelings can also be used to burst a building down very quickly to open a path for your main forces. Banelings are also great to use with other ground units to do a great surround, which lurkers cant do. Another things you can do with banelings that you can't do with lurker is to bomb drop them on your opponent's army with your main forces are fighting.

I just did what you did. Say good things about something I like and totally put down something I don't like just to make my personal preference look even better, all in a masterful display of ignorance about the things I dislike.

We're all equally stupid in this endless argument.


Banelingtraps work totally different than lurkertraps (which can be reeinforced with units, while banelings just die after beeing scanned) and thus don't give a significant positional advantage to the zerg, while Lurkers are definitly able to do that.
Banelings used with other ground forces can be great, yes, but that's where the problem is because it all leads to blob-syndrome of all units beeing clumped together at a single position of the map. And Lurkers could also be used with other units, leading to significantly more micro on both sides by the way.

Also, lurkers provided much longer fights than Banelings, which are pretty much the epitome of a unit ending a fight within miliseconds. Just watch that Jaedong vs Stork replay, no SC2 fight would ever last as long as some of the battles they have there, and that's why micro becomes even more important as there is more time for each player to micro their units.
When they were introduced, he made a witticism, hoping to be liked. She laughed extremely hard, hoping to be liked. Then each drove home alone, staring straight ahead, with the very same twist to their faces.
Faze.
Profile Joined November 2010
Canada285 Posts
April 16 2011 13:11 GMT
#413
On April 16 2011 21:56 teekesselchen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:52 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.


You said that SC2 micro looked boring and was unspectacular. I posted a video of marine micro avoiding baneling splash, much like that Nada video where he avoid lurker splash by marine micro. You reply by explaining how banelings and lurkers differ in use? What does that have to do with anything?


1. There are way less battles leading to that kind of interesting micro in SC2, with some baneling battles beeing an exeption much rather. Vulture vs Dragoons got completely removed for example and was kinda awesome, and Hellions vs Lings is way less spectacular and easier to micro than Vulture vs Lings.
2. Imo Lurkers were much harder to micro than banelings, and also harder to counter with micro
3. I just said that Banelings are no suitable replacement for Lurkers, because Lurkers had more than just that micro aspect, but also a game-designing aspect which Banelings totally miss.


Except that banelings are NOT a replacement for Lurkers. If any zerg unit has to be lurker replacement that would be roaches when used defensively. Burrow micro to avoid forcefield and such looks more like lurker than banelings will ever do. Of course we'll never get any marine micro against burrow roaches because of scans. If lurkers make a comeback in HotS I bet they'll morph from roaches, not hydras. (Let's pray for moving burrowed lurkers... oh boy)
D:
karpo
Profile Joined October 2010
Sweden1998 Posts
April 16 2011 13:12 GMT
#414
On April 16 2011 22:06 StarStruck wrote:
...

If you ask anyone who has seen him play from the beginning they would tell you the same fucking thing. There is no argument and your opinion is baseless. The facts are in his play and other obligations. They are all there. It isn't arguable.

Geoff the "Incontrol" freak Robinson did make a few comments regarding NaDa's play in the NASL a few days ago when he was up against dde. Geoff praised NaDa for his spectacular mechanics (keeping his minerals below 200-300). He showed great macro, but hell he made so many mistakes with his micro and macro he could have lost that game at least 5 times. -_- You can bark and play the 'opinion' card all you want, but the fact of the matter is he isn't even close to playing like his former self. You know what they called him before Genius Terran? TORNADO Terran because the guy used to be everywhere at once fucking your shit up. He is the grand master of SK Terran. The fucker perfected it.

With that said, this thread is about improving SC2 game play. That is what you should take away from it, so take off your beer goggles and stop trying to turn it into something different.

The fact you trying to attack players who have YEARS of experience playing RTS games should make you step back for a second and think about what they have to say.

karpo, the same could be said about Hasuob's Void Rays at the LAN in Italy. Then you got to ask yourself, how do these units effect the game flow and map control?


I don't need to ask myself anything. I responded clearly towards someone posting about SC2 MICRO being boring and unspectacular. He responded by sidestepping the question and talked about unit purpose, something i didn't bring up at all.

If someone disses SC2 micro and i call him on it doesn't mean that i need to delve into unit balance or game flow. Marinekings baneling micro is considered awesome by many just as Nadas micro against lurkers.
LOLingBuddha
Profile Joined February 2011
Netherlands697 Posts
April 16 2011 13:14 GMT
#415
After reading the entire OP i think the only thing that SC2 is missing is its 2 expansions.
ReluctantCoyote
Profile Joined February 2011
Australia7 Posts
April 16 2011 13:14 GMT
#416
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.

I'm sorry for nitpicking, but I think it is important to stress the major difference is that there is much more of a 2 player interaction between lurkers and marines compared to banelings. Effectively using lurkers requires refined judgment and micro skills. You've gotta decide when and where you burrow which all depends on the angles of attack and retreat, how far you can move in + the amount of marine shots you can take + the distance from the marines you want to burrow and how you believe the other player is going to respond to your own lurker positioning. Learning how to effectively create well spread and angled attacks with lurkers took me quite a while to learn, but the mindgames and positioning war between lurker + lings and rines is something hard to match. Imagine the excitement of hellions hitting the perfect line up of workers, except in order to fire they must hold position for half a second and wait. All this is completely ignoring the evilness of hold position lurkers too.

Unfortunately, I've not seen/been able to do any baneling micro apart from using them as mines or having other units act as meatshields/distractions while rolling fullspeed towards the biggest marine group. They're an excellent addition to the game, but sadly can't compete just yet.
aurum510
Profile Joined July 2010
United States229 Posts
April 16 2011 13:15 GMT
#417
On April 16 2011 21:56 teekesselchen wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 21:52 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:47 teekesselchen wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:36 karpo wrote:
On April 16 2011 21:27 teekesselchen wrote:
I fully agree to the opening post. The relation of playstyles and unit handling was really reduced to a poor one in SC2. This is what I think since the start of beta and I'm very glad that somebody formulated that so well here.
Micro looks absolutely unspectacular, boring and goes way too much into detail instead of beeing obvious like in SC:BW.

Also, the ratio of the importance of single units (or low numbers of units) got really lowered imo. One Reaver? Yes, please. One Colossus? Na, better build four or five! One Siegetank defending an expansion in BW? Can be quite effective. One Tank defending an SC2-Expansion? Waste of money, will get off a maximum of two shots before dying.

SC2 mechanics indeed did reduce the importance of units to the dps I deliver, agreed. As everything just clumbs up to a big blob with everything attackning, micro got diminished.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZM4u99GDTE


How is this micro any different from Nada micro against Lurkers? Also Sjows great banshee control and decisionmaking in his recent Dreamhack run was great, just some examples.


The Problem is much more fundamental: Lurkers are some kind of special defense unit. They are made for cost-efficient defense, but beeing tricky in offensive use.
What are Banelings? Just another unit that has no specified situation, can work offensively and defensively.

Why is that important?
Lurkers helped spreading out matches. When I can defend a base super cost efficiently with a couple of lurkers and static defense and perhaps some mobile forces which I can move there any time, then it means that I do not need my main army to defend that spot.
Because even if I'ld lose those lurkers and that base, the probability that I killed a lot of enemy units is high.

That does not work anymore in SC2. Almost every army fights at the almost same cost efficiency level regardless whether it attacks or defends. Having 10 Banelings defend an expansion on their own? Better not, they'll just splash before reaching their enemies. That's where the difference between a Lurker and a Baneling is.


You said that SC2 micro looked boring and was unspectacular. I posted a video of marine micro avoiding baneling splash, much like that Nada video where he avoid lurker splash by marine micro. You reply by explaining how banelings and lurkers differ in use? What does that have to do with anything?


1. There are way less battles leading to that kind of interesting micro in SC2, with some baneling battles beeing an exeption much rather. Vulture vs Dragoons got completely removed for example and was kinda awesome, and Hellions vs Lings is way less spectacular and easier to micro than Vulture vs Lings.
2. Imo Lurkers were much harder to micro than banelings, and also harder to counter with micro
3. I just said that Banelings are no suitable replacement for Lurkers, because Lurkers had more than just that micro aspect, but also a game-designing aspect which Banelings totally miss.


I think you're missing the point. The most micro intense thing in SC2 is simply boxing a few marines and right clicking. That's it. I'm sure you can think of a thousand different things that required more micro in SC1.
Coolwhip
Profile Joined March 2011
927 Posts
April 16 2011 13:15 GMT
#418
Not sure if it's related. But I can't imagine being interested in watching SC2 for 10 year. There is only so much that players can do because SC2 is pretty simplified.
imp42
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
398 Posts
April 16 2011 13:16 GMT
#419
very nice OP.

In my opinion it IS the early stage of SC2 that is somewhat responsible for this. (I know you won't accept this as the only reason.)

People claim that you need less APM for SC2. I would rather say that you could do MUCH more amazing stuff with high APM in SC2. For example, I can't recall many (if any) battles where the zerg player is controlling two muta flocks simultaneously in SC2. But just because you CAN have them in one control group doesn't mean you have to. Harassing 2 bases at the same time could be amazing, but the skills needed aren't developed yet.

To me, a key concept of RTS is to overburden the opponents ability to multitask. And there is still huge potential.

Another point / reason might be the apparent choice of Blizzard to keep games short(er). Which resolves in less numbers of epic battles.
50 pts Copper League
craz3d
Profile Joined August 2005
Bulgaria856 Posts
April 16 2011 13:18 GMT
#420
On April 16 2011 10:25 mahnini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 16 2011 10:20 Antisocialmunky wrote:
I think there is game-flow type play but people aren't utilizing them fully yet especially because things go boom quite quickly in SCII. After all things like creep and pylon warp in require 'setup' time.

it's somewhat similar, but kind of misses the mark. if we are playing PvZ in SC2 and i come out slightly ahead, i can IMMEDIATELY attack you creep or no creep. there is no position you can hold if you don't have a unit advantage. with units like lurker or siege tank, i can more effectively hold ground so a slight advantage doesn't turn into a snowball steamroll.


They also took away the high ground miss percentage, another aspect of BW which affected positional play.
Hello World!
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 70 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 6m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft654
StarCraft: Brood War
Leta 511
TY 373
PianO 264
actioN 71
Noble 70
sSak 60
Sacsri 13
Yoon 9
yabsab 4
Dota 2
XaKoH 443
ODPixel202
League of Legends
JimRising 671
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K950
Other Games
summit1g8874
shahzam1044
monkeys_forever241
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick36256
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH350
• Hupsaiya 58
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• Migwel
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• tankgirl 1
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota298
League of Legends
• Rush1633
• Lourlo1566
• Stunt421
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
3h 6m
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
9h 6m
WardiTV European League
9h 6m
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
Replay Cast
17h 6m
RSL Revival
1d 3h
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
OSC
1d 6h
Replay Cast
1d 17h
RSL Revival
2 days
Classic vs Cure
FEL
2 days
OSC
2 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
3 days
FEL
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-07-07
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.