|
On June 17 2011 08:50 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:38 ChrisGraphex wrote:On June 17 2011 08:32 GoDLy MD wrote:On June 17 2011 08:31 NickelStarCraft wrote:No, terran does not take more micro than protoss, it is equal. The only successful protoss is MC and he is widely regarded as having top micro and would do well as any race Sorry dude, your wrong. Terran does in fact require more micro. You can rant all you want about whatever you want but your simply wrong. That's an opinion not a fact. care to back it up? I swear this kid has downsyndrome, yes TERRAN does require more micro. Just watch high level play. Lol, or watch IdrA 1a his army Micro is mostly strategy dependent. Mech builds that Goody uses for example require very little micro, but good macro, positioning, and timings. Heavy bio builds are much more micro intensive, especially if ghosts are abundant, and heavy drop play is very multi-tasking intensive. Protoss heavy sentry usage is very very micro intensive, while heavy collosus play is relatively light on micro requirements. Heavy blink stalker usage is very micro oriented as well. Even with Zerg, destiny style ling/infestor is very very very micro intensive, as micro will completely determine if he wins the entire battle with minimal losses, or loses everything without doing any damage at all, similar to mass sentry strategies with protoss. Baneling drops are also way hard to pull off effectively, if you don't think so then try it. Mass roach strategies require little micro however, and rely upon positioning, macro, and timings.
I realize that and take everything I said back, I'm a moron and I apologize
|
On June 17 2011 08:43 NuKedUFirst wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:
WoW! Does anyone find it amazing that only 1% of players beat the single player on brutal? Being on TL so much and playing with BW vets in such a insular hardcore community. You forget that 99% of people are noobs that just want to fly big motherships around the map. Its really pretty neat that Blizzard focus as much as they do on us because we clearly are not the majority lol. There are many people who really don't care about campaign, myself included, I started it on hard or brutal and haven't even played 3 missions. I don't see whats so HARDCORE about beating a single player. Scripted encounters, you can play em over and over till you win. GJ.
I finished it on hard but I can't be bothered going back to do it on Brutal, not that I couldn't do it, (I'm around 1.1k Masters~), I'd rather just play ladder or watch streams
|
On June 17 2011 08:47 GoDLy MD wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:44 rysecake wrote:
I don't think terran necessarily requires more micro than protoss. Multitasking is a word I think that
suits better. I personally think that terran has more capability for multitasking. As heavenly said, the races are extremely similar. However, while protoss is strong in a deathball, it's weak split up. Terran's strength is in small mobile groups hence players that take advantage of the high multitasking ceiling such as MMA do very very well. however, multitasking is a different discussion to micro.
Terran has the ability to force your opponent to multitask at the same level as you (or die)*. That's different to *requiring* multitasking though. Terran doesn't have to play like that, and if you do and your opponent keeps up then they are multitasking just as much.
*or more actually; it requires more multitasking to defend a shift-clicked drop+attack on nat than to execute it.
|
The whole people getting upset over someone saying terran takes more micro thing is like getting butthurt over a zerg saying they take more macro. They're all different races with different requirements from the player. Multitasking does = micro. You're micro managing you're units, in several small groups. Microing doesn't just equal clicking. C'mon people, terran are known for their micro like zerg are known for their macro, it's not a big deal.
|
So guys about that interview...
|
On June 17 2011 08:50 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:38 ChrisGraphex wrote:On June 17 2011 08:32 GoDLy MD wrote:On June 17 2011 08:31 NickelStarCraft wrote:No, terran does not take more micro than protoss, it is equal. The only successful protoss is MC and he is widely regarded as having top micro and would do well as any race Sorry dude, your wrong. Terran does in fact require more micro. You can rant all you want about whatever you want but your simply wrong. That's an opinion not a fact. care to back it up? I swear this kid has downsyndrome, yes TERRAN does require more micro. Just watch high level play. Lol, or watch IdrA 1a his army Micro is mostly strategy dependent, not race dependent. Mech builds that Goody uses for example require very little micro, but good macro, positioning, and timings. Heavy bio builds are much more micro intensive, especially if ghosts are abundant, and heavy drop play is very multi-tasking intensive. Protoss heavy sentry usage is very very micro intensive, while heavy collosus play is relatively light on micro requirements. Heavy blink stalker usage is very micro oriented as well. Even with Zerg, destiny style ling/infestor is very very very micro intensive, as micro will completely determine if he wins the entire battle with minimal losses, or loses everything without doing any damage at all, similar to mass sentry strategies with protoss. Baneling drops are also way hard to pull off effectively, if you don't think so then try it. Mass roach strategies require little micro however, and rely upon positioning, macro, and timings.
Exactly this. There are micro oriented unit compositions and non-micro oriented ones. We have the luxury of different unit compositions in each match-up.
Great interview with David Kim, it was great to hear how he approaches balance and was it just me or did he give a subtle hint they were looking at balancing the warp prism in some way?
|
On June 17 2011 08:43 NuKedUFirst wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:
WoW! Does anyone find it amazing that only 1% of players beat the single player on brutal? Being on TL so much and playing with BW vets in such a insular hardcore community. You forget that 99% of people are noobs that just want to fly big motherships around the map. Its really pretty neat that Blizzard focus as much as they do on us because we clearly are not the majority lol. There are many people who really don't care about campaign, myself included, I started it on hard or brutal and haven't even played 3 missions. I don't see whats so HARDCORE about beating a single player. Scripted encounters, you can play em over and over till you win. GJ.
He's saying people on TL forget that the majority of star craft 2 players are noooooooobs
|
On June 17 2011 08:54 blinkingangels wrote:
The whole people getting upset over someone saying terran takes more micro thing is like getting butthurt over a zerg saying they take more macro. They're all different races with different requirements from the player. Multitasking does = micro. You're micro managing you're units, in several small groups. Microing doesn't just equal clicking. C'mon people, terran are known for their micro like zerg are known for their macro, it's not a big deal.
Multitasking isn't a subset of microing.
I'm upset because I'm a pedant :<
|
David Kim trolling tossers who use motherships... good stuff ^^
|
On June 17 2011 07:36 Rybread wrote:
He mentioned that not a lot of people beat the campaign on Brutal, but I don't think thats because it's difficult, I think thats because people are too busy playing multiplayer. My friend who is in the bronze league beat it on Brutal...he only uses his mouse and scrolls with the arrow keys, doesn't use any hotkeys or control groups and beat it on Brutal. I'm honestly not sure how.
He hacked, period.
|
On June 17 2011 08:46 Veritassong wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:43 NuKedUFirst wrote:On June 17 2011 08:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:
WoW! Does anyone find it amazing that only 1% of players beat the single player on brutal? Being on TL so much and playing with BW vets in such a insular hardcore community. You forget that 99% of people are noobs that just want to fly big motherships around the map. Its really pretty neat that Blizzard focus as much as they do on us because we clearly are not the majority lol. There are many people who really don't care about campaign, myself included, I started it on hard or brutal and haven't even played 3 missions. I don't see whats so HARDCORE about beating a single player. i started on brutal, thought it was too time consumer, switched to casual and made mm and 1a through my missions. got alot of good practice of terran micro on the way. t1a click
Stop posting garbage. I dare you to try and 1a stim your way in higher leagues.
|
"Many people on TL found that Brutal wasn't hard enough"
Dustin laughs it off like he's kidding.
Have you seen the thread where people beat almost every mission on brutal with just marine medic?
David Kims infestor brood lord comment.
Exactly WHO is complaining about this? This is the first I've even heard of it being an issue.
Every time I see a Dustin/Kim duet I get a little more scared at what may happen.
|
On June 17 2011 08:53 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 08:47 GoDLy MD wrote:On June 17 2011 08:44 rysecake wrote:
I don't think terran necessarily requires more micro than protoss. Multitasking is a word I think that
suits better. I personally think that terran has more capability for multitasking. As heavenly said, the races are extremely similar. However, while protoss is strong in a deathball, it's weak split up. Terran's strength is in small mobile groups hence players that take advantage of the high multitasking ceiling such as MMA do very very well. however, multitasking is a different discussion to micro. Terran has the ability to force your opponent to multitask at the same level as you (or die)*. That's different to *requiring* multitasking though. Terran doesn't have to play like that, and if you do and your opponent keeps up then they are multitasking just as much. *or more actually; it requires more multitasking to defend a shift-clicked drop+attack on nat than to execute it.
You're almost making it sound as if it's easy. The amount of actions (particularly in tvz) is probably the highest needed in sc2. To leap frog tanks, split marines vs banelings, while macroing and expoing, while managing 1-2 drops at different locations is alot harder than you're making it sound. I personally have the highest apm when I'm playing terran.
|
As someone who's played both terran and protoss quite a bit, I must say that both races are demanding in terms of control. Using abilities is pretty easy in sc2, it was intended in the game design. Blink, FF's, keeping zealots up front, moving back wounded colossus, storm or feedback, takes solid control to do effectively. So does using hellions, siege tanks, MM kiting, drops, ghosts ect. To describe either race as 1a is just plain wrong. I would like to say however, a lot of people miss the fact that protoss macro is more demanding that terran's. You have to place every warpgate unit you make and move your screen to a pylon, use crono constantly (most upgrades and build times for protoss are set with this in mind) Which can be demanding on your multitask. So I would say terrans micro is slightly more demanding while equally necessary to protoss's but the difference is made up for with the difference in macro control.
|
On June 17 2011 06:16 On_Slaught wrote:
"The mothership is more geared towards casual players." - David Kim
Holy shit that is a HORRIBLE explanation for why they keep a HORRIBLE unit in competitive play. How about give the terran all the units in the single player too for the bronze and gold league players?
They just told protoss that you get one less viable unit b/c its fun for some players who don't care about winning.
At least they mention a possible warp prism buff! 
|
New maps is the most exciting thing to hear! ( 1/2 the ladder maps )!
Oh and infestor broodlord is a scary combo, but I pretty much just know i'm dead if i let it get to that point and don't have ghosts and vikings to deal with it.
|
Terran Micro in a fight:
Vs P: use MMM ball in run around and shoot fashion, involves just micro'n units directionally(as opposed to spell casting), pressing stimpack in intervals of time and keeping awareness of force-field potentionals.
Siege tanks: Hardly used in TvP due to zealot speed rushes counter hardcore. Only really used as static defense or some contains. Micro needed? Minimal, More of a strategy intensive unit than micro intensive unit.
Ghosts: 1a in main army then spam emp
Vikings: Micro intensive IF you for some reason want to something other than just 1a'n with your main army(I.E. probe harass or taking out void rays/collosis)
Banchee: Get cloak asap and try and go for timing windows. Normally un-microable escape if the P player has detection + blink stalkers or phoenix(s)
Raven: similar micro level as ghost
Hellions: Most intensive micro unit that is still viable vP. Actually requires attention and constant movement.
(other units aren't used much in TvP due to such small timing windows of usefulness(reaper) or just cost-damage inefficiency(battlecruisers).
Protoss micro in a fight:
Vs T:
Zealots - just throw them out when you are being offensive. That's it.
Stalkers - Scout, 1a, then blink if damaged or for some profitable move(blink requires more micro than stim due to blink being more useful being used at different reactionary moments.
Sentrys - Forcefields EVERYWHERE. Or at least thats how it seems. Requires awareness and tactical placement. Not too hard on the micro. Unless you love the hallucinations tricks.
Dark Templar: Run around 1a then run some more
High Templar: Feedback anything with energy. Move slow as hell and storm spam ( similar to emp spam)
Immortals - See zealots but tougher and ranged ground unit
Collosis - Just keep behind ball of zealot/stalker.
Pheonix - Requires attention and a bit of hit and run micro. Overall not too hard.
Voidrays - 1a
Mothership - Pew pew pew, more tactics than micro
Observers - More awareness and positioning than micro
Warp Prisms - As much micro as you would use on drop ships, in some cases more
Carriers - 1a, oh no too close. Move back... 1a...No wait(repeat)
Micro P is....only as hard you make it. Depends on the tactic involved. I.E. Blink stalkers or warp prism + templar play would require lots of micro. While a collosis rush less so.
Conclusion: Depends on tactics
Micro T is....All in the ghosts and marine, marauder balls. Hardly any spells to cast. Mostly just running around. Only if you are going to do something like hellion drops into banshee harass or trying to dodge storms does the micro get higher. Mostly it's just macro and tactics with a few stimpacks thrown in here and there.
Conclusion: Depends on tactics
Overall: Micro is a individual experience. Respect that.
Note: My analysis is brief and not to be taken overall seriously. Otherwise I will hunt you down and force field your face.
Oh and zerg has the most micro.
|
On June 17 2011 09:06 Probe1 wrote:
"Many people on TL found that Brutal wasn't hard enough"
Dustin laughs it off like he's kidding.
Have you seen the thread where people beat almost every mission on brutal with just marine medic?
David Kims infestor brood lord comment.
Exactly WHO is complaining about this? This is the first I've even heard of it being an issue.
Every time I see a Dustin/Kim duet I get a little more scared at what may happen.
MorroW said it was a little too good against Terran :S
|
On June 17 2011 09:06 Probe1 wrote:
"Many people on TL found that Brutal wasn't hard enough"
Dustin laughs it off like he's kidding.
Have you seen the thread where people beat almost every mission on brutal with just marine medic?
David Kims infestor brood lord comment.
Exactly WHO is complaining about this? This is the first I've even heard of it being an issue.
Every time I see a Dustin/Kim duet I get a little more scared at what may happen.
Well to be honest it's taking the guy a really long time to beat it with just marine medic, and it's because the units are inherently OP, making the campaign more fun. I don't see why people want to spend 100 hours+ trying to beat difficult missions when they can just do that on multiplayer. Personally, I play single player to use RIDICULOUSLY op units to wreck AI on whatever difficulty i choose, be it casual or brutal. I don't think anyone is actually really disappointed with the campaign difficulty, I think we would all rather them keep it the same and push out more battlenet2.0 features.
|
<3 David Kim
I love how they are waiting for BL+Infestor to develop further, as now with cheaper ghosts that composition isn't as strong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
