On January 01 2012 06:28 Ares[Effort] wrote: 100% agreed with Day[9]
As a WarCraft 3 player I can say that I totally agree with Day[9]. I love StarCraft 2, but there really is something missing when it comes to controlling units. It just doesn't feel as good as in games like BW or W3.
split focus firing during engagements with large armies. E.g. selecting a cluster of 5 stalkers to target one medivac instead 10+ or in a roach v roach our stalker v stalker army to prevent unit/damage overkill
On January 02 2012 00:24 MorroW wrote: the reason u dont see more micro or more cute moves is not because it doesnt exist. its because this game is fucking hard, i want to do so much more stuff with my units and builds, and use so many timing windows to do stuff but its very hard.
wait for players to become better and im sure youll find that awesome :p
just look back on micro control or games in general 1 year ago, they just amoved their armies and walked around in a death ball all game long. where as now its alot better, but its far from perfect, trust me
Coming from a pro, this means a lot.
I do agree with Day[9], but I also think it will get better in the future. There are still imitations in the game design, as people have mentioned, but micro-wise, I don't think anyone is near full potential.
the game mechanics of protoss as a race and the warp mechanic in specific was ill-thought out. tbh, i dont put much hope on any strategy game developer out there at the moment. with the command & conquer series that went in completely the wrong direction with #4, and dawn of war having done the same with DOW2. perhaps generals 2 will bring new hope as it should probably not have any instant reinforcement/teleporter mechanic for super strong units. also, protoss only have to 1a tttttttttttttt to win. end of rant.
On January 02 2012 04:17 CptCutter wrote: the game mechanics of protoss as a race and the warp mechanic in specific was ill-thought out. tbh, i dont put much hope on any strategy game developer out there at the moment. with the command & conquer series that went in completely the wrong direction with #4, and dawn of war having done the same with DOW2. perhaps generals 2 will bring new hope as it should probably not have any instant reinforcement/teleporter mechanic for super strong units. also, protoss only have to 1a tttttttttttttt to win. end of rant.
i don't agree completely. While the microed units in BW could be up to 10 times better, microed units in SC2 may get up to 2-3 times better (not 1.5 as day9 says). The downside of a micro heavy game is, that mechanics get more important than strategies. So players peaked in skill when being 15-18, rarely a player older than 20 was successful.
I feel like this is something that could be changed relatively easily with some tweaking. See this thread to get an idea what sort of things could be changed.
Of course, there probably are a few micro tricks our players haven't found yet - this is not an unreasonable prediction having seen how it went in BW.
Day[9] is absolutely right. I finally got around to watching the video and he does an excellent job of explaining the difference between the games.
The thing is, for the average gamer, it doesn't matter. They struggle to make the right decisions as is. Macro is not that easy. Multitask is hard. Handling the big decisions is difficult. And that's FINE. Perfectly okay. Most players in BW were the same way, and that's why they played BGH or Fastest so they didn't have to worry as much about expanding decisions and macro and were more interested in just making a ton of units and having fun blowing things up. That's what low level SC2 is like, and it's perfectly cool, and pretty fun. I still love playing BGH every now and then. It's simple and enjoyable.
BUT, Starcraft is not just another game you play for fun. It is like paint, rather than an etch-a-sketch. It's a medium through which we can express our abilities, thoughts, and emotions. Broodwar is incredible for this, unmatched in the arena of RTS. You can tell exactly when players are stressed, distracted, overtaxed. You can see the finesse by looking at their units. The difference between a bad player and a good player is enormous, but so is the difference between good players and great players, and great players and pros, and pros and Flash. In SC2, it's just bad players and good players, and then there's a little extra you can see from great players, but by and large it's just bad and good. That's what Sean is talking about with the "unit multiplier" which is by far the best analogy I've ever heard for it..
So that's why most people just don't complain about it. In fact, most people enjoy the easiness of the game and the lack of depth because it's more accessible and you don't have to work as hard to do what you want. But lets be honest... LOTS of people played customs in BW. LOTS of people played BGH. There was no lack of casual experience in that game. People just found a good way to achieve it on their own without sacrificing the depth at which the actual game was played. SC2 simply removed the complexity from the start, which is horrific design and insulting to the players, because it's a way of saying, "you're not capable of appreciating depth." Look at the number of fans BW had, and still has! Of course people can appreciate it!
I also think that's why people watch professional sports. People want to be amazed. They want to worship the players as gods who can achieve things beyond what us mere mortals can achieve. There's a reason you don't see chess on TV. It's really hard to appreciate the depth of thought it takes to make a really good move. It takes you sitting down and really looking deeply at the game, almost playing it in parallel. It's not a spectacle, it's a puzzle. That's great for some people but it's not good entertainment.
Look at Broodwar now. There are things players do, like JD's double stacked muta, or Bisu's dragoon micro, Stork's reaver use, Flash's... everything - they're simply inhuman. None of us ever expect to be able to play like that. Even the best foreigners are simply in awe of what these guys can do.
Compared that to SC2. Yes, SC2 is flashy, and takes skill, and is a decent strategy game. But, I don't see plays that are simply so awe-inspiring that I would never be able to play at that level. The skill is not in execution, but in decision making, and anyone, even a computer program, can have good decision making. Decision making is not awe-inspiring, just in the way that chess is not awe-inspiring. It's just not entertaining at the same level that sports should be.
This is why SC2 struggles as an esport, and simply cannot have the longevity BW has, at least in its current form.
SC2 has to undergo a major redesign, both of the units, and some of the mechanics. Blizzard is capable of this. Anyone who played War3 knows the difference between RoC and TFT. It was a complete rework of the game. We need this for HotS.
On January 02 2012 04:26 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: i don't agree completely. While the microed units in BW could be up to 10 times better, microed units in SC2 may get up to 2-3 times better (not 1.5 as day9 says). The downside of a micro heavy game is, that mechanics get more important than strategies. So players peaked in skill when being 15-18, rarely a player older than 20 was successful.
Ridiculous. Stork is... 25? Flash is at least 20 and still untouchable. Age has nothing to do with it. It's just that players have the time to dedicate most when they're 15-18 and only a few choose to continue pursuing it as a serious career past then.
On January 02 2012 00:24 MorroW wrote: the reason u dont see more micro or more cute moves is not because it doesnt exist. its because this game is fucking hard, i want to do so much more stuff with my units and builds, and use so many timing windows to do stuff but its very hard.
wait for players to become better and im sure youll find that awesome :p
just look back on micro control or games in general 1 year ago, they just amoved their armies and walked around in a death ball all game long. where as now its alot better, but its far from perfect, trust me
You know this but for those that don't I'll spell it out: Big reason we don't see anywhere close to perfect micro(or what it could be called) in sc2 when the armies grow right now is because it requires extreme reaction times and apm.
Ironically, sc2 would probably be more BW like when it comes to top players getting more out of their units than others if the game speed was for example 30% of what it is now.
These things should change some as people get better and expansions could change things as well. And there are other areas that probably have huge potential gains, I doubt it will be possible to compete at a high level using the default keyboard layout in a couple of years for example.
On January 02 2012 00:24 MorroW wrote: the reason u dont see more micro or more cute moves is not because it doesnt exist. its because this game is fucking hard, i want to do so much more stuff with my units and builds, and use so many timing windows to do stuff but its very hard.
wait for players to become better and im sure youll find that awesome :p
just look back on micro control or games in general 1 year ago, they just amoved their armies and walked around in a death ball all game long. where as now its alot better, but its far from perfect, trust me
You know this but for those that don't I'll spell it out: Big reason we don't see anywhere close to perfect micro(or what it could be called) in sc2 when the armies grow right now is because it requires extreme reaction times and apm.
Ironically, sc2 would probably be more BW like when it comes to top players getting more out of their units than others if the game speed was for example 30% of what it is now.
These things should change some as people get better and expansions could change things as well. And there are other areas that probably have huge potential gains, I doubt it will be possible to compete at a high level using the default keyboard layout in a couple of years for example.
Easy way to test this out. Play a game at slower than fastest speed. See what you can achieve. Your control will be better but there isn't any hidden dimension of play that emerges. It'll just be more of the same type of micro, which is target firing, kiting, and spreading vs aoe.
On January 01 2012 18:59 Masayume wrote: What day[9] meant was the following:
If you have a battle in Brood War, each individual unit has a baseline a.i. In this old game the a.i. had some bugs, but these bugs created opportunities for a better player to increase the value of each unit through good control. A good example would be mutalisks against scourge. Scourge was a fast flying unit, that would suicide and explode on other air units to kill them. Now a lesser player would perhaps be able to get a shot off with hold position micro and kill 1 or 2 scourge with any luck, but then lose his mutalisks to the remaining scourge.
A mediocre player could use patrol commands moving in a certain degree, away from the scourge, to sometimes dodge a scourge and get a free shot off at the same time.
A great player (Jaedong), would be able to use Patrol micro to first patrol away from a scourge in a certain angle, immediately issue another command to another angle upward, and then patrol command behind scourge to completely dodge the scourge, and hit them at the same time. The mutalisks would never get hit and just survive.
This means that a mutalisk can dramatically increase in value through very precise control, partly caused due to old and bugged A.I.
Now let's go to Starcraft 2 shall we, and let's take Phoenix vs Mutalisk as an example. The Phoenix is faster than the mutalisk, and shoots automatically while moving. This would allow for some good kiting micro you'd think. I will explain how that is impossible due to the nature of SC2 A.I.
If a pack of mutalisk chases you and you fly away from them, kiting, you will get further and further away from the muta pack. This means you have to fly closer to them again to resume kiting and damaging these mutalisks. The player using the mutalisk can abuse this fact by turning around, forcing you to follow them to do damage, and then when you get closer they turn around randomly and get some good shots off at you.
In BW, with good control, you can prevent this, but here is the deal with SC2 A.I. Air units always glide a little bit in the same direction as their attack, this is extremely problematic when it comes to phoenix, because it's a feature of the A.I. that prevents air unit stacking (viking flower) and is also caused because of the *shoot* animation. When the Phoenix fires his attack, he will glide until the animation finishes.
So when you want to outperform mutalisks, you'd want to move in, get a shot and turn back immediately to avoid taking damage from the mutalisk to increase the value of your Phoenixes. But in SC2, you get punished for trying to do so. When you move in and your Phoenixes shoot, you click them away from the mutalisks, but they all glide for a short amount of time. In this time, a mutalisk pack can gain exactly enough ground to hit your Phoenixes, and actually do more damage than you did if the pack is at a medium size. In this case you actually decrease the value of your units if you try to micro more than just moving away.
Another good example is the Stalker. In BW, you could kite marines with dragoons because their attack was instant. You could shoot and move away in time just before the marine could get in range to hit you once. In Starcraft 2, Stalkers have 1 more range than marines. You would think you would be able to kite marines then, right? Sorry to dissapoint you, but this is not the case, due to the following:
In Starcraft 2, some units can fire instantly in every angle, 360 degrees around them. The marine is one of these units, which makes stutterstep what it is today, while that's actually one of the easiest micro moves to learn. Some units, have to turn around and face the target before they shoot, and some even have an attack animation that has to finish. Stalkers are one of these units.
The scenario will be the following, you move and see a marine pack heading your way. You start using attack move toward them, and move away from them right when the Stalkers fire their shots. Unfortunately, the Stalkers have to turn to face the location that you issued the move command in. Now the marines get to fire their shots and do some good damage to your stalkers. Your micro now makes Stalkers slightly better against marines (10% approx), where it could have been much more. Due to the way the A.I. and attack animations work in SC2 (this is partially due to 3D), you lose all these possibilities to increase your unit value and turn battles around with less.
Lastly we have units such as the Marauder, Infestor, Sentry, Mothership. What do these units have in common? Answer: They all prevent the other player from microing their units by restricting or halting their movement.
The Marauder gets concussive shells for a measly 50/50 in cost. Now they can do even half-assed stutterstep and kite pretty much everything except speedlings. So the Terran player has to only do a bit of stutterstep, to have vastly more efficient units than you (think of roach vs marauder, roaches cannot ever connect).
The Infestors fungal most of your army, and the Zerg proceeds to surround you and destroy you. What can you do about it in the battle? Exactly, nothing at all. Pre battle you can spread your units and continue to split them a bit while in battle but these are things you could do in BW as well. But what you did not have in BW were spells and abilities that prevented movement in such a way that it became detrimental to the opposing player. Fungal does damage and roots units, force fields completely block movement in an area, concussive shells snare you for 0% extra effort.
In BW you had Stasis, that could freeze units in an area, and do aoe unit nullifying you say? Well due to the nature of BW, the armies were much more spread out, and larger. Stasis and maelstrom were the only spells that could do an aoe lockdown, but the trick was that if you damaged a stasised unit, it would come out of it. Maelstrom did root biological units only (which makes it very niche right off the bat), but did no damage to them. In order to get maelstrom, you had to research a completely different tree of spells, for a unit that was completely niche for fighting massive bio armies. You would only see Dark Archons in PvZ late game.
But again, this wasnt as powerful because BW had more spread out armies, and because of the nature of micro possibilities to increase unit value + some A.I. bugs, there were fights all over the map instead of one big battle, because this further increased your efficiency, and you could hold against vastly bigger armies due to the micro possibilities + highground advantages (low to highground attacks only had a 70% chance to hit in BW).
In conclusion, I agree with Day9 100% and hope we can get some kind of superb control reward back into SC2, instead of only gaining tiny benefits or even getting PUNISHED for trying to micro. This combined with a smoother A.I. means that the correct action in a lot of situations is to invest your apm into other actions than micro, because these other actions give you a bigger reward.
Your argument isnt really arguing with Day9. You say that + Show Spoiler +
"But what if the protoss player wanted to get more out of his units? I would suggest that this is entirely possible, simply by removing them from battle. Lets say the same battle occured, but with 6 less zealots. Instead, a warp prism droped 4 zealots in the Terrans newly saturated third base during the battle. Those 4 zealots are worth more to the protoss now than the original 6 in the battle. "
But this isnt an example of the micro that day9 was talking about (imo). You are talking about separating your units from the battle, Day9 was talking about getting more out of your units in the battle itself.
But i still think you are right in that they will be worth more... Hero does this a lot, he barely trades army with the opponent but he drops at the same time which gives him an advantage.
I'm so confused at this point. Is this thread to argue about whether or not micro tricks exist in SC2 at all? If they exist but their marginal value is less than other decisions people have to make (macro, harassment)? For ex-BW players to yell at whippersnapper SC2 players to get off their lawn? Or to catalog some micro tricks that already exist to improve battle outcomes?
I didn't play BW or WC3 so I don't know enough to compare them. But here's my contribution to the last one. If you're in a TvT split map, sit-there-with tanks situation, float a barracks and land it in front of the tanks. The rax will absorb all of the tank shots for free, so your army can run in afterwards. The concept is the same as the general tanks/first or medivac drop over the tanks, just taken to the extreme. Not exactly the highest skill but effective. Take that, mech turtlers!
but bw had the same options as in sc2 but with more mechanics required to do them. this may change in the future. i think one of the main problems is that sc2 is significantly faster than bw. this raises a ceiling, but also makes it more difficult for people to do the required micro that bw took.