EPTNow if you're talking about Protoss and Zerg, then I definitely agree they need work.
APM/mechanics vs strategy - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ssxsilver
United States4409 Posts
Now if you're talking about Protoss and Zerg, then I definitely agree they need work. | ||
|
HanFuzi
Israel80 Posts
| ||
|
tuho12345
4482 Posts
On December 30 2012 03:57 FromShouri wrote: I just recently picked up Company Of Heroes 1+expacs on steam for 13$, as I was playing them i realized how much more important tactical and micro commands were then just "macroing out new units" like sc2, it is def more a micro based game as opposed to a good balance of Brood War where micro (all-ins, reaver drops, storm drops, etc.) can overcome macro, but macro can also over come micro(no use getting 30+ kills on 1 unit only to have it run over by 5 control groups). Most RTS lend themselves to only 1 very well while the other takes a back seat(Supreme Commander is definitely a good example of a more macro oriented RTS with backseat micro, while Company Of Heroes is more a micro oriented RTS with back seat macro). Brood War is the only game I've ever seen do both correctly, SC2 is getting there but for every step it seems to take, it takes steps back more then it does forward. That said, you can't execute certain strategies if your mechanics are shit(try executing sair/reaver pvz without constantly baby sitting the shuttle so it doesn't explode to scourge, targeting reaver's shots, running corsairs from scourge and macroing all at the same time. Also this is why a ton of people failed doing the "Bisu Dark Templar FE" build right after he first unveiled it against savior because they'd lose their dark templars to stupid shit and then get over-run because the zerg took a macro advantage. damn, you could have bought CoH for $1 with HumbleBundle lol. Anyway yeah CoH is extremely multitask-demanding, really nice game indeed and not too macro heavy. However SC2 maps > CoH for viewer wise. | ||
|
PanzerElite
540 Posts
On December 30 2012 17:10 tuho12345 wrote: damn, you could have bought CoH for $1 with HumbleBundle lol. Anyway yeah CoH is extremely multitask-demanding, really nice game indeed and not too macro heavy. However SC2 maps > CoH for viewer wise. CoH is really really easy, just blob no need for multitasking. And sorry but you have to be a lot faster in bw/sc2. | ||
|
dynwar7
1983 Posts
If APM is spam then it is useless, but if it is put into action then it is a good thing, but dont worry too much about strategies.....as long as you know standard builds like 1 rax fe, 1 gate fe etc, and know your general game plan like going bio or mech or protoss deathball or mass ling/infestor, then you should be ok. But threads like this tend to become a BW vs SC2 debate..... | ||
|
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7524 Posts
| ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
Personally, I think BW is closer to the perfect mix, perhaps a little too heavy on mechanics, but SC2 has gone way too far from the importance of mechanics compared to what I feel to be the "perfect" mix. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
On December 30 2012 18:33 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: Sc2 is too focused into apm/mechanics. Age of Empires is perfect game if you dont count balance in. You need very very good mechanics but also so so much strategy skill. AOE2, right? Too bad the whole meta revolves around Hun feudal rush. I don't really think that's a legit example. Certainly a mechanical baseline should be high - but not TOO high. Too high and it becomes difficult for people to execute a simple gameplan. | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
If a game is mainly centered around either tactics (which are pretty fast reduced to mindgames) or micro, it becomes far too volatile. Whole games decided by just a 30s engagement because you failed to either anticipate your opponents move shortly before that engagement or you failed to micro in that short engagement. But if the game would be focused around macro, then you might lose the engagement because your macro was lacking the ENTIRE game (short slips of macro can be caught up if you macro better afterwards). | ||
|
Rokevo
Finland1033 Posts
| ||
|
FireMonkey
Australia105 Posts
Just imagine a military genius playing SC2 - the only problem is, he is in bronze league because his "Mechanics" aren't good. This is a true story, his name is FireMonkey. | ||
|
TsGBruzze
Sweden1190 Posts
| ||
|
Elldar
Sweden287 Posts
| ||
|
Gihi
384 Posts
| ||
|
CarelessPride
United States146 Posts
| ||
|
honkeybeef
United States143 Posts
| ||
|
QuackPocketDuck
410 Posts
Also allows players to display more character in their play, not really that interesting watching people preform same builds, unit control is different player to player and is what I end up remembering after watching a great sc2 match is great engagement / awesome unit control and I don't really care about something like third cc timing for example. | ||
|
Bahku
United States182 Posts
On December 30 2012 19:45 honkeybeef wrote: When a certain race is overpowered, I would say that simply picking that race is better than both apm/mechanics and strategy. Maybe fixing the game is a more important topic than strategy and apm. While SC will always have its hardcore fans, I surely miss the days where it was the biggest Esport! LoL OP! Lol, do you think Blizzard doesn't want the game to be balanced? Of course they're trying their hardest, it's just an insanely difficult job. | ||
|
SnuggleZhenya
596 Posts
| ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
On December 30 2012 17:59 PanzerElite wrote: CoH is really really easy, just blob no need for multitasking. And sorry but you have to be a lot faster in bw/sc2. CoH requires a pittance of the raw actions that Starcraft does but does require an awful lot of split attention. Just blob is a good way to smash nubs but once you start hitting good players you get fucked up if you can't handle capping all the fringes and not losing units in stupid ways. | ||
| ||
