|
This probably has been mentioned before but where is the option to vote the game should become easier?
This option should at least be in a poll if the game should become more difficult
Annyway:i think the game should become mechanically easier
Not so much the micro, but more the macro.
Atm macro takes to much time compared to the more fun part of microing your units and moving around your armies
so: the game should become "easier"
Unfortunatly this option is not in the poll, so i didnt vote
edit/suplement:
It would not kill sc as an esports,how difficult a game is (mechanically) has little to do with its popularity.
If annything the relation is inverse , definatly after a cerain point.
(example the huge popularity of lol wich is considered an easier game then dota and such, it had 120k vieuwers in kiev)
The skill ceiling will still be near infinite, so easier is relative here, i just means that macro should take less time.
The fun when watching streams is in watching the armys and engagements (at least for me) and not watching players macro.
|
On January 24 2012 04:04 ejozl wrote:
Well as a casual spectator, you don't really have the experience of how hard it is to macro and stuff like that.
So it's about strategy and action packed games. SC2 has this to a greater degree, cuz mechanics are less defined to making the best player.
Strategy being guessing games and 'action packed' being fewer shorter engagements than BW. Got it.
|
United States9232 Posts
On January 24 2012 04:21 Rassy wrote:
This probably has been mentioned before but where is the option to vote the game should become easier?
This option should at least be in a poll if the game should become more difficult
Annyway:i think the game should become mechanically easier
Not so much the micro, but more the macro.
Atm macro takes to much time compared to the more fun part of microing your units
so: the game should become "easier"
Unfortunatly this option is not in the poll, so i didnt vote
Well, that would completely destroy the game as an ESPORT, which is kinda what keeps the community alive imo.
|
MVP/NesTea/etc. These guys trained in professional BW settings for years, solidifying their RTS experience and skills. In less than 1 year, people who have never played RTS games before can take games off these guys due to the lack of mechanical skill required to play Protoss and Zerg. I'm sorry but MVP and MMA should never lose a game to someone like TiTaN or BlinG or NaniWa. You would never see a Chess grandmaster lose to an amatuer. Theres a pretty clear reason why we've been able to see a number of Protoss and Zerg foreigner champions compete with Koreans but not a single foreigner Terran has ever come close. SC2 Terran at least requires some degree of mechanical skill and mastering of techniques to remain potent at the pro level. Zerg and Protoss are almost all "macro" and 1a. I put macro in quotes because it is such a reduced and watered down version of SC1 macro that it's laughable.
This might sound like whining, but hey, you'd be hard pressed to find a pro that disagrees.
|
United States9232 Posts
On January 24 2012 04:23 SupLilSon wrote:
MVP/NesTea/etc. These guys trained in professional BW settings for years, solidifying their RTS experience and skills. In less than 1 year, people who have never played RTS games before can take games off these guys due to the lack of mechanical skill required to play Protoss and Zerg. I'm sorry but MVP and MMA should never lose a game to someone like TiTaN or BlinG or NaniWa. You would never see a Chess grandmaster lose to an amatuer. Theres a pretty clear reason why we've been able to see a number of Protoss and Zerg foreigner champions compete with Koreans but not a single foreigner Terran has ever come close. SC2 Terran at least requires some degree of mechanical skill and mastering of techniques to remain potent at the pro level. Zerg and Protoss are almost all macro and 1a.
This might sound like whining, but hey, you'd be hard pressed to find a pro that disagrees.
Drewbie took a game off MMA haha. And I take it you don't count Jinro as a foreigner?
|
On January 24 2012 04:19 FezTheCaliph wrote:
The success of SC2 in the west over BW has more to do with technology(in my opinion) then with either game. eSports could thrive in Korea because they had a means to watch it(TV) and an audience for it. That spawned it as a career and grew the scene and with the bigger/better scene the skill went up. SC2 is popular in the west now because we have a means to watch it. Streaming quality makes it possible to watch events all over the world. Blizzard's rise in popularity has given SC2 more fans as a result. Lots of SC2 fans came from WoW. Nowadays everyone knows about Blizzard, through WoW mostly but you could stop people on the street and ask them about WoW and they would most likely know what you are talking about. Not at all the case when BW was out. Also, Korea has one of the best internet connection speeds in the world, which meant that the online experience of BW was much better and more accessible as most places in Korea had internet access, certainly not the case ten years ago in the West(at least in the US).
tl;dr SC2 scene is bigger now because of Technology being better, Blizzard being more popular and well known, and greater use of Internet and computer games compared to ten years ago. These play a much bigger factor in the game's success then the difficulty of play
Pretty good assesment of the situation. Majority of the viewers don't watch both of the games due to their difficulty, but because they have the means to follow it and they enjoy watching two armies battle in real time. That's about it.
True, if you get to the subtlety of the games then BW is going to be the one with much more depth. But aside from really hardcore fans or those who are just curious to find out about it, many viewers might not even actively care about them at all, as in them not being a major factor in their following of the game.
|
On January 24 2012 04:10 fraktoasters wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2012 03:49 Warillions wrote:On January 23 2012 21:01 -stOpSKY- wrote:
I would definitely like the see the game increase in difficulty and involve more skill. I mean you can make it into mid level masters just on pure macro ability alone. You dont even need any form of micro or high sustained APM and multi tasking skill. if good macro alone sets you above 99% of other players, that means its not easy to macro which = hard. if you said u can macro perfectly and still not break silver league. that means 80% or more can macro perfectly which means its not hard. what makes it hard is your opponent. Good macro gets you into Masters in NA and the lesser servers. Try going on the KR server. This is just about NA players being awful rather than the game being easy, so yes it is about your opponent.
wtf can u not read?
thats not even relevant to our conversation. he said the game is easy because good macro makes you btr than 99% of other players. which is because good macro is so hard to perform that 99% of players have nowhere near top notch macro. all other game factors ignored. looks like your trying to get your post count up. you might as well go into the idra fanclub thread and post about your local weather. thats how relevant you are to this topic
|
I'll just be waiting for the day for the sc2 community to either stop saying that they don't want the game harder like bw or to stop complaining that X race is just a-move.
|
I want SC2 be more of a scouting game then coinflip plus makes it more things to do, so that way pros shouldn't lose to amateurs.
|
Do you guys think that making the game even faster than the current "faster" mode would be one option to rise the skill cap? Or would it make the game too fast to understand as a viewer? Also i think it's not enough for mechanics to be hard: they also have to fun. Imagine a game where you could only select one unit at the time and you must order each attack individually. This game would be hard as hell, but the micro would be monotonious and boring. In sc2 in order to have good stalker micro you must watch your unit's health/shields and blink wounded ones back and target fire enemys and if possible, also dodge missiles and make decissions such as "Do i blink up to the high ground?" or "Do i blink offencively to chase those units?"
|
No, we do not want the game to be harder. Pros are still super far away from the skill ceiling. Average master league players are TERRIBLE at the game. I'm mid-masters and I am GOD AWFUL at this game.
To be more precise: I play Zerg. My macro is far from perfect, even just on 2-3 bases. My ability to multi-task is pretty terrible -- as soon as I start having to defend multiple drops, or attacking in multiple places while also expanding, injecting, spreading creep, etc. I just fall apart. I've played 1500+ games, and this game is still way too hard for me to even think about approaching a pro level of skill. I am, however, a mid-masters player and am one of the statistically top players in the world (I mean top 5%, not top 500).
Sure, pros will occasionally drop a game to a random unknown player. But that does not mean the game is too easy. It just means there is a bit of randomness, and pros occasionally play bad games. There is a reason why Mvp and Nestea ALWAYS do well in Code S, and there is a reason why Koreans dominate MLG. It's because the skill cap is way higher than pro skill level now, and the best players outperform those who are not as good.
|
On January 24 2012 04:29 Warillions wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2012 04:10 fraktoasters wrote:On January 24 2012 03:49 Warillions wrote:On January 23 2012 21:01 -stOpSKY- wrote:
I would definitely like the see the game increase in difficulty and involve more skill. I mean you can make it into mid level masters just on pure macro ability alone. You dont even need any form of micro or high sustained APM and multi tasking skill. if good macro alone sets you above 99% of other players, that means its not easy to macro which = hard. if you said u can macro perfectly and still not break silver league. that means 80% or more can macro perfectly which means its not hard. what makes it hard is your opponent. Good macro gets you into Masters in NA and the lesser servers. Try going on the KR server. This is just about NA players being awful rather than the game being easy, so yes it is about your opponent. wtf can u not read? thats not even relevant to our conversation. he said the game is easy because good macro makes you btr than 99% of other players. which is because good macro is so hard to perform that 99% of players have nowhere near top notch macro. all other game factors ignored. looks like your trying to get your post count up. you might as well go into the idra fanclub thread and post about your local weather. thats how relevant you are to this topic
Wow rage more because I disagree with you slightly?
Edit: If it's not clear what I said let me rephrase it. You guys seem to think good macro makes you better than 99% of the players, and I'm saying that's only true in the NA server. On harder servers, you have to have a lot more than just good macro, which is actually a good thing about the game.
Just because NA players are terrible doesn't mean the game's hard.
|
I feel like a lot of the things that changed from BW were more fixing design flaws than trying to change the game. A good example would be the control groups. As much as people like to claim that BW's system "required more micro" to move units, the majority of it consisted of monotonous "box-and-go" control. I sometimes joke about Ex-BW player's streams that have them APM spamming workers at the beginning of games, not because it is useful, but that boxing is an uncontrollable muscle spasm caused by seeing Starcraft units. The real things that could be changed to reflect BW strategy are factors such as defender's advantage, more positional-dependent combat, and stronger benefits for controlling high ground.
|
I hope SC2 stays how it is now, and that HOTS makes minor changes.. NOT the changes they have already shown... :-\ In fact I don't even want minor changes, I love the game so much It's hard to imagine a different game.
|
It's tough. I liked the sentiment of the op. I used to watch BW starting in 07 and I loved that game though I don't have half the understanding of it that I believe I do have of SC2.
For me it comes down to the fact that SC2 for all its faults is a really fun game to play (a lot of the time) relative to BW. The mechanical ceiling of BW would just require so much more of an investment than SC2. My comp issues and thesis work aside, I think I could make a pretty decent run in Masters and execute faux pro builds fairly competently and enjoy doing that. The races are pretty unique and all fairly fun.
That said I've lost a lot of my enthusiasm for watching the game for multiple reasons. The muta ball is one brilliant example of this. One player litterally just builds this snowball unit and moves it forward, backwards and side to side with great effect. There's very little micro skill that can be observed or appreciated by the build or the execution of it. There's a rudimentary and even easy transition from it too to slow moving air tanks... not dark swarm pushes or epic defenses. These are not Jaedong's mutas or hell even that bastard SHiine's. They are simply a fast mobile unit that does a lot of damage.
The game lacks the cute units that make for epic come backs. I think terran is the only race that's truly resilient in sc2. Zergs have an issue with efficiency at a certain point and toss once dead stays dead.
Unlike BW there are less feats that look godlike or amazing. These players look a lot more human. Boxer's dropships are a 100x more impressive than the shift queue drops of sc2. There is nothing that begins to match the epicness that is sair/reaver. A lot of the tricks done by sc2 pros (esp foreigners) look human rather than godlike.
To summarize, an easier game is much more accessible. A much harder game is more easy to appreciate.
edit: while I'm talking about the viewing experience I should concede that it could also be an issue of storylines. None of MVP's victories approach the 08 incruit finals let alone Jangbi Fantasy of this past fall or any of Flash's blowouts.
|
On January 24 2012 04:25 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2012 04:23 SupLilSon wrote:
MVP/NesTea/etc. These guys trained in professional BW settings for years, solidifying their RTS experience and skills. In less than 1 year, people who have never played RTS games before can take games off these guys due to the lack of mechanical skill required to play Protoss and Zerg. I'm sorry but MVP and MMA should never lose a game to someone like TiTaN or BlinG or NaniWa. You would never see a Chess grandmaster lose to an amatuer. Theres a pretty clear reason why we've been able to see a number of Protoss and Zerg foreigner champions compete with Koreans but not a single foreigner Terran has ever come close. SC2 Terran at least requires some degree of mechanical skill and mastering of techniques to remain potent at the pro level. Zerg and Protoss are almost all macro and 1a.
This might sound like whining, but hey, you'd be hard pressed to find a pro that disagrees. Drewbie took a game off MMA haha. And I take it you don't count Jinro as a foreigner?
Well, yea, Jinro had some good runs early on in GSL. But remember these were the same seasons that Artosis qualified for. Then there was Thorzain winning TSL, but everyone knows that tournament was completely plauged by lag issues for the Korean players. And yea, theres a few instances of foreign Terrans winning a match or 2 against a Korean but honestly which foreign Terran has the same power as HuK, IdrA, Stephano or NaniWa against Koreans?
|
I'ts at a good difficulty. Bad players can still play and good players can excel beyond what they can. Scouting has to be improved is all
|
I'll say what's already been said : Blizzard needs to improve the scouting, to reduce the gambling part of the game and fix some match up.
|
On January 24 2012 04:23 SupLilSon wrote:
MVP/NesTea/etc. These guys trained in professional BW settings for years, solidifying their RTS experience and skills. In less than 1 year, people who have never played RTS games before can take games off these guys due to the lack of mechanical skill required to play Protoss and Zerg. I'm sorry but MVP and MMA should never lose a game to someone like TiTaN or BlinG or NaniWa. You would never see a Chess grandmaster lose to an amatuer. Theres a pretty clear reason why we've been able to see a number of Protoss and Zerg foreigner champions compete with Koreans but not a single foreigner Terran has ever come close. SC2 Terran at least requires some degree of mechanical skill and mastering of techniques to remain potent at the pro level. Zerg and Protoss are almost all "macro" and 1a. I put macro in quotes because it is such a reduced and watered down version of SC1 macro that it's laughable.
This might sound like whining, but hey, you'd be hard pressed to find a pro that disagrees.
I see what you are saying about new players taking games off of the top players, but that should happen in this game as it is not nearly as "figured out" as BW. No one has seen every strategy yet.
Each new GSL season, some player with a previously underused strategy/style does fairly well by exploiting weaknesses in the current metagame. Once the more experienced players play a couple games against them, their success slows down and eventually they stop winning games.
Top Terran players like MMA and MVP are more likely to lose to a well executed P or Z build than to another T build because they don't know the ins and outs of the opponent's race as well as they know their own. Going after the #1 Terran player with the same forces/builds he already knows like the back of his hand is very difficult. Coming at him from a completely foreign (zing!) perspective makes it easier to get in cheap shots and throw them off their game.
Every player should lose games, even the top players, and a lot of these are losses because of build orders/strategies as much as from mistakes and mis-clicks. The latter will happen less with MMA and MVP, but it still happens.
On topic: I think the game has the right amount of difficulty as it stands. It reminds me of the Capcom fighting games, with sort of an inverted bell curve of ability. When you first pick up the game, you can quickly find simple strats that are relatively easy to execute (1a armies are comparable to button mashing in fighters. Sometimes you just get lucky.)
As you start to learn more about the game and metagame, you slightly alter your build into something more complex, losing some of your concentration because it is now split on managing 3 bases and playing for the long haul, not just 1 base-all-in. I know when I did this in ladder, I started losing a lot more than when I was just 7 RR or 6 Pool.
But, eventually being able to execute more and more complex strategies while holding off the easier to execute attacks from my opponent helped me to climb back up on the bell curve.
At one end you have guys that 6 pooled into Masters. On the other you have guys like MMA/MVP. At some point, the 6-pooler will get lucky and pull off his more easily executed strategy against a much better player and take the better player by surprise. I see nothing wrong with this as it keeps all players 'honest' and makes for better tournaments because some unknown underdog can take at least a couple games off of the Best of the Best. Does this mean the game is "easy"? No. Just like in Chess, some guy with a limited knowledge can be doing things that make so little sense to the Chess Master, confusing them and possibly causing them to make silly mistakes.
It's the human element of competitive games, and it's what makes it entertaining to watch for a lot of people.
|
Canada11363 Posts
I don't really see why this needs to be mutually exclusive. The sorts of things I would like added would keep the skill the same for bronzies, but allow for greater levels of skill for pro's. For instance- muta micro, wraith micro, vulture micro. The mechanics to do those sorts of micro tricks while macroing at the same time is insane. But those same units can be 1a just the same (or move command with the mouse if you don't even know about attack move.) They just weren't nearly as effective when in the hands of the pro's. But mutalisks are pretty straightforward. Grab 12, move them forward to attack, grab the next 12, rinse repeat. But to take away the rapid reflex, muta control that could dart into a base to pick up stray units at will- why would we ever take that away when nothing better replaces it?
Carrier micro too- noobs would use them just the same as 1a, but pro's could attack retreat and hover across cliffs. Reavers were actually easy to use- they just weren't very effective without micro. But you could send them on their poky way or leave them for defence.
Ok, so maybe getting rid of smart casting would make things harder for noobs. But honestly, real newbs don't really use those sorts of units anyways. And if they did, I'm sure they would be just as happy to fire off one really awesome spell that killed stuff than to spam 't' with little discernible difference to the marauders, tanks or roaches.
Or take Dark Swarm- zerg was easy to use as newb. Make banks of hatcheries so you can select 12 larvae at a time and build 200 zerglings and send them at a base. True newbs with their 12-40 apm aren't going to use Dark Swarm anyways. But it's a tool that can be used by even D- or E players going on iCCup.
And that's why I don't really see it as mutually exclusive. Newbs will gravitate to the easier to use units and experiment with the cool ones. (I taught one guy to macro, but then he just made masses of goliaths so that he could have 6 control groups to 1a2a3a4a5a6a across the map. He eventually learned that straight goliaths is a bad strategy.) But you don't take away tools for the pro's to use.
And if we're talking about problems of making the game harder- Blizzard kinda already did that with the arbitrary macro mechanics. Consider, if Protoss didn't have chronoboost, how would it be balanced? Why the build times would be sped up. What about inject larvae? Larvae would spawn faster or Zerg units would become tougher. They've pulled out some pretty straight forward stuff to make the game harder and rebalanced the timings and cost based on that. When really it could have been buried in adjusting the numbers a bit and forget about the macro mechanics altogether.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
