EPTThe Rhino in the Room - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ReaperX
Hong Kong1758 Posts
| ||
|
qrs
United States3637 Posts
| ||
|
Kanku
France123 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:36 ReaperX wrote: Why are you comparing the quality of game-play in a game that is over 10 years old to a game that is just nearing it's 1st year? Go look at Professional play in BW in the first year and tell me that it wasn't as high quality as SC2 Can people please read at least the last page of a topic before posting in it? Your point has already been adressed... | ||
|
ReaperX
Hong Kong1758 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:39 Kanku wrote: Can people please read at least the last page of a topic before posting in it? Your point has already been adressed... I posted the message around 20 minutes ago, but for some reason it only popped up now. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:31 MrCon wrote: That's true, but still sc2 is evolving at an impressive pace. Watch games from today's GSL, compare them to 2 GSL ago, then compare to 2 GSL ago, to 2 GSL ago. You'll see that the "it's a young game" argument is making a lot of sense. If sc2 was stale, I could agree with your post. But it's not. There is still no such thing as a standard build. There is a monthly standard, yes. Oh, I agree completely. Neither game is stagnant and they're both moving at a different pace. That's why I think it's useless to say "look where SC1 was after 1 year" because while they play similarly, SC2 has a much more advanced community than SC did. First year of learning in SC1 != first year of learning in SC2. I've had some of the same concerns as the OP, but they're only concerns, not beliefs. Why? Because we just don't know yet. A lot of things in SC2 are mechanically easier than BW, but clearly players have not reached the mechanical limit in either game yet and we don't know if they ever will. If SC2's skill cap is lower, that still doesn't mean we'll ever reach it. | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:36 sluggaslamoo wrote: Although there is the fact that new ways of using units and strategies often coincided with better players coming from BW  Some clear examples. Clare -> MKP -> Marine splitting 1988 -> MMA -> Crazy drops (probably inspired by Bisu coming from SKT) I'd say a big reason for the rapid pace is because we are getting brain dumps from players transferring from the BW scene. Yep. And if I would dare to give an explanation, I would say it's because bw players have the mechanics to implement those things in their play. Which strengthen the point of the skill ceiling that is not that easy to attain (even tho lower than bw) | ||
|
aimless
United States57 Posts
On July 13 2011 21:56 MrCon wrote: While I agree with your article to a certain extent, I think your over exagerating the easier macro effect : 1/ Dominant in broodwar means 70% winrate. Dominant in sc2 means a 70% winrate too. Yes, flash loses as much as Bomber or MC or Nestea, which are the current dominant sc2 players.And still somehow people keep saying sc2 is "volatile" compared to bw. 2/ Even in GSL there is a big macro disparity between top and average players. Nada's TvT in group stage was ahead 20 supply in a pure macro game without harass at the 10 minute mark for instance. Macro is easier in sc2, yes. Perfect macro is not easy still. 3/ You say the skill gap between foreigners and korean is smaller and smaller. While that was true some months ago, (the GSL world championship period), that gap has increased a lot lately, to the point of foreigners have like a 10% win ratio vs koreans in recent big tournaments. So no, anyone can't take a game from anyone. At least not with more than 10-15% chance. When was the last time MC lost to another not top player ? You can search, you won't find. #1 I don't know what to make of the 70% win rate yet. It could just be my perception coloring my judgment, but I feel like on any given day, any given top pro can win. In BW, it seemed like there were stretches of time where a particular player was untouchable. I just don't see that in SC2 and I'm not sure that I will see that. #2 Agreed. There is still room to for improvement at the top. I don't know exactly if things will shake out like this "skill ceiling" or not (I think I mentioned that in OP, maybe). I don't think there is a player yet who has flawless macro. Hopefully a couple of the young guns will come up and all do it at the same time, and then this post will look clairvoyant. #3 This is true. The foreigner results really aren't supporting my argument. I really don't know why foreigners are doing so bad lately. I suppose there is just still so much room to grow that the Koreans are outpacing the world again. I feel like this won't be the case (because of my agrument that it is easier to get to the top in SC2), but right now I agree this is the weakest part of my OP. | ||
|
MCDayC
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On July 13 2011 14:18 425kid wrote: You're right obviously about the macro. I disagree about the micro though. MKP and Polt and MC have proved that insane micro can overcome bo losses. Mkp most notably with the hold against an unscouted proxy 2 gate in his base, or his marine splits against kyrix. But he and polt also do subtle things like targeting collosi with a small groups of marauders mid battle. Polt also with that dropship micro on dual sight where he lifted two full dropships over forcefields against blink stalkers. MC anytime he has sentries. Macro limits out really quickly, but I think the micro ceiling is really high. This. Because of the prevalence of splash damage, and the way units clump, I personally think that the potential for micro in SC2 is absolutely huge. Macro isn't what made BW great, otherwise it would be a bad game. And for one thing, there is no reason to think SC2 will not have the strategic depth that BW has. | ||
|
Snuggles
United States1865 Posts
I mean the mechanics don't have to be blisteringly hard to get used to. I just wish there was a change in the game where your mechanical skill will really pull through despite how much easier this game is compared to BW. | ||
|
mdb
Bulgaria4059 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:50 MCDayC wrote: This. Because of the prevalence of splash damage, and the way units clump, I personally think that the potential for micro in SC2 is absolutely huge. Macro isn't what made BW great, otherwise it would be a bad game. And for one thing, there is no reason to think SC2 will not have the strategic depth that BW has. Where is this potential and why hasnt it been found yet? I find it hard to believe that there is much potential for micro, given the fact that thousands of people are abusing every single unit trying to find a way to improve their game. | ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
On July 13 2011 18:07 Daozzt wrote: A better comparison for chess would be if they replaced every piece except the king with queens. Game's too complicated and hard anyway. Horrible analogies, but thanks for trying. Harder does not necessarily mean better, but in this case, BW is a better competitive game and has stronger competition (for now, at least). They're not horrible analogies. They're the OP's analogies. He is saying that the SC2 is too easy because you don't need to focus on non-strategy game things as much. He is saying that sending a worker to mine is as and even more important that strategizing. This is what BW defenders sound like. It sounds silly when the logic is used on non-rts things because the logic is stupid. Harder does not mean better. A Chess Game with 15 Queens and 1 King will be just as easy to play as the current system. JUST AS EASY, NOT EASIER. Because Chess is turn based and requires ZERO mechanics--there is no way to change how the units move that will make it easier to play. People can still play at 100% efficiency no matter how many queens you give them. However, when people start saying things like "BW is better because you need to you can't que construct building commands" they sound silly because they're saying that BW is better because it is harder to click around the screen (not because the game is harder to strategize but is instead harder to click around in) That sounds stupid, because it is stupid. If the only thing that's impressive about BW is that it's hard to click on the screen and that it's hard to keep track of everything, why don't they get rid of the keyboard, nothing but mouse, that will be harder and only hard core practice will make you good. How about remove the keyboard and the monitor. Just the mouse and they don't get to see anything. They have fucking memorize where to click and keep track of the mouse by counting pixel movement with their hands. Yeah, that'll make the game even harder and only the best can win. BUT THAT SOUNDS STUPID DOESN'T IT?!?! | ||
|
Gurgl
Sweden308 Posts
Some units are completely dominant in SC2 armies, the colossus comes to mind. When engaging a protoss army that has colossus it often comes down to if you can somehow neural them, keep them out of the fight, or snipe them within the first seconds of the fight before they destroy your army. In PvT it's often a fight of HT's vs ghosts, feedback vs EMP, not very exciting to see who can get their spell off first imo. In ZvT we see more and more ghost vs Infestor showdowns. I hope Blizzard rethink the unit design a bit for heart of the swarm to make for more interesting battles, they should start with replacing the colossus because I can't think of a more boring unit. | ||
|
aimless
United States57 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:37 qrs wrote: Very nicely done. Whether or not one agrees with all your points and conclusions, you presented them very well, and you sparked a good discussion, too. Thanks! No, thank you! :) | ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:57 mdb wrote: Where is this potential and why hasnt it been found yet? I find it hard to believe that there is much potential for micro, given the fact that thousands of people are abusing every single unit trying to find a way to improve their game. Thousands of people aren't good at SC2. There's still a very select few that are on the real edge of skill. This coupled with the fact that we HAVE seen a huge increase in micro only in 2-3 months makes me think that we'll see more in the future. We've already seen a slight move away from blob vs blob in high level games. Multiprong harass, expansion snipes etc are getting more popular and will probably continue to evolve especially for the APM monsters. Colossus balls get destroyed alot easier now than a few months ago and we're seing great new strats and multipronged attacks (Puma drops, Sage multipronged attacks, DRG muta destruction). | ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:57 mdb wrote: Where is this potential and why hasnt it been found yet? I find it hard to believe that there is much potential for micro, given the fact that thousands of people are abusing every single unit trying to find a way to improve their game. Yes. All the BW strategies were figured out in the first 12 months and Korea dominated it all. Oh wait, the first year of tournament BW was won by a drunk white guy who played random during the finals for the lols (and still won) From that perspective, I guess BW must be sucky game. I bet you BW fans of 12 years later HATE the BW fans of year 1 BW. Year 1 BW was for noobs and BW was a sucky game where foreigners beat hard working Koreans because the game was too easy. | ||
|
Maghetti
United States2429 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:22 Kanku wrote: You missed the point it seems, he was obviously trying to say that even if "perfect macro" isn't possible in sc2 having better macro doesn't impact as much as it does in BW. Yeah, I got that, and I am saying he exaggerates the effect of that. Macro and mechanics matter less...but not as much less as he says, changing the whole equation entirely. macro, mechanics, and multitasking are still plenty difficult, and the skill ceiling is still higher than anything that can be reached by humans. | ||
|
Vansetsu
United States1452 Posts
But again back to my main point.... they are just simply different games. I really think its a little disgusting when people try to take one particular mechanic of any videogame, ie "macro" and make it an absolute in determining what is or what does create a skill ceiling. Yes, multi tasking is certainly a skill, and its an opinion to argue its the hardest skill or most important skill, but to give it reign as some skill ceiling determination factor is just ignorant in my opinion. SC2 so far is a balance of unit control, production, timings, and strategy build order meta mind games ect. We DO have players from a diverse amount of natural and trained abilities playing this game. But its personal opinion whether Moons micro is as incredible, hard, or relavent to SC2 as some bonjwa like Flashes macro. (And please dont try to make a rebuttal based on my lack of SCBW overall knowledge, I know these players have obvious other skills as well.) The point here is that every player has strengths and weaknesses, and can certainly be refined and improved on in various enviroments over time, But, in a new game, with new pathing, and new mechanics, old skills arent so easily trancendent, nor are nessacarily as dominentley relavent. With some game determining factors being made more or less important, and changed all together, this imaginary libram of "these particular factors are what matter in SC2" will always be a dynamic guessing gam, until we have a finished product forged from a diversity of styles of play and user generated content. In the end... that makes all of these "competitveness" arguments kind of worthless. Super Smash brothers is a pretty competitive game, albeit linear, but competitive. So is CS. But it doesnt mean the timings, abilities or skills or psychology which create succseful players in these games trancend directly into the next game of the genre for these players... certainly not at an establishd S class level. Bottom Line : New game, skills from the genre of game trancend in different ways because of this, an its all opinio what particular set of skills determines a ceiling, let alone in a game that is technicaly not even "done" yet in mulple facets. (forgive any spelling or puncuational errors, I am typing on a foreign keyboard :3) | ||
|
mordek
United States12704 Posts
| ||
|
aimless
United States57 Posts
On July 13 2011 22:42 Jibba wrote: I've had some of the same concerns as the OP, but they're only concerns, not beliefs. Why? Because we just don't know yet. A lot of things in SC2 are mechanically easier than BW, but clearly players have not reached the mechanical limit in either game yet and we don't know if they ever will. If SC2's skill cap is lower, that still doesn't mean we'll ever reach it. I guess I get more concerned than you? :) I agree the mechanical limit hasn't been reached and we might never reach the limit. But even if we don't, is it possible the game is just eay enough for a lot of players to get reasonable close to the limit? Because then the games would be great, but there would still be a sensation that the talent isn't there because no one player can really outshine another. I'm sure this will get taken out of context (and I don't mean for it to disparage SC2), but what if BW is like chess (fun game with a high skill ceiling that sees occasional dominant players like Kasparov and Fischer) and SC2 is like checkers (fun game with a lower skill ceiling and I can't name any great checkers players)? | ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
On July 13 2011 20:01 sluggaslamoo wrote: WHATTTTT?????????? We play both BW and SC2, we also watch both BW and SC2, whats your point? Of course because Flash is dominating because he has the worlds fastest fingers, the fact that he comes up with a new build every finals that completely 1a2a3a steam rolls the opponent has nothing to do with how good he is. Obviously his damaged wrist is actually a lie because he has to have the fastest fingers in order to win right? In the past year there have been several revolutions in strategy, 14cc, Sky Terran TvT (Wraith, Valkyrie, BattleCruiser), Reality build, Valkonic, Mass Queen (the BW ones), SKTerran opening into Heavy Metal, just to name a few. But hey even if I state all these facts it won't make a difference. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=243288 I guess I will always bite and never learn I didn't have a problem until I got to this bit. Go watch a Bisu game please, and then come back to me about multitasking.  So what you mean by posting that link is that you are right and i'm wrong so i should apologize and shut up. Right? So the fact that Flash is no the fastest guy means that everything i said is wrong? The fact that Flash plays this game since atleast 5/6 years and wins since 2008 isn't right? Doesn't that change something? SC2 has 1 year man!!!!! only 1! and BW is 12! Do you know the diference between football now and 50 years ago? or nba? In football goalkeepers could pick up the ball from the defender, now they can't! In nba you didn't have 3 point line and now you have! Do you know why? Because people understood that this would benefit the game and it's tactics. Same thing with SC2 it takes time to balance a game and control it like it does with all sports! Everybody know that it's better to run with a sport sneakers but you can also run in timberland boots.. Do you really see the games where for instance MKP or MVP went to the up&down matches? They were outplayed period! They played bad and they would have lost to many good players! People keep forgetting that BW was out there way before any teams and it's not the same with SC2! People were trying to go pro when the game was in beta, on the release there was allready pro teams and lots of tournaments. People were expecting this and got it from the start! That's why the game has evolved so much and was changed so much and it will keep on changing until most of us and the pros are happy with it! I see more flaws in BW then benefits, so why should they listen to you and not to me? | ||
| ||
