StarCraft 2: What's The Problem - Page 65

On October 09 2013 22:21 Squat wrote:

AOE 2 is a very fundamentally sound game that has aged remarkably well. It's easier to play than BW mechanically and it's quite a bit more forgiving for small errors. It also simulates the strategy part of RTS very well.

I used to play it a ton back in the day, got fairly decent. It's definitely one of the all time best RTS games, probably the best for casual play, it's easy to pick up and play, and feels grandiose and epic. It never had the depth or razor edge balance of BW, some civs are clearly broken towards both ends of the spectrum, but that is typically not very important for a bunch of students getting together to play just for fun.

Edit: It just struck me, Koreans were borderline broken in AOE2, meaning they are OP in RTS games both in and out of the game. Nerf pls.

On October 10 2013 01:21 Grumbels wrote:

The only game I've played for the last three months is Settlers II, yay for old school strategy games. Actually, I find the slow-paced gameplay where you're building up a civilization and economy very interesting, it's an area where BW and SC2 are lacking. For understandable reasons, as it would conflict with the fast-paced competitive gameplay ideal, but it makes the economy/macro aspect one-dimensional some times. A lot of the subtle nuances of Starcraft's economy aren't really apparent to casual players anyway, they will simply see zerg production and economy as 'build drones' -> 'build army', they won't consider all the reasoning that goes into deciding when to produce either of the two.

On October 09 2013 23:43 XaCez wrote:
People expected SC2 to take over the world in the same way that BW took over Korea. Once people realized that wouldn't happen they turned their attention towards talking shit about other games (mostly LoL) and stopped caring about SC2, subsequently becoming overprotective of its legitimacy as a sport (Orb witch hunt among others). Of course, Blizzard also dropped the ball on a lot of things, but the community did its share as well.

On October 10 2013 01:45 JustPassingBy wrote:


Eh, I wouldn't say that. Actually I don't see how the sc2 community is significantly worse than any other (e)Sport community out there. Care to name a few examples? :-/

The Orb incidence would've happened like that in any other community, in my opinion. Every community absolutely hates being lied to, especially from people who do it to talk down some mistake they did.

On October 10 2013 01:51 shaftofpleasure wrote:


"BW Fans love the game purely on nostalgia"
"HAHA BW going down. Take that elitist jerks"


-Most New SC2 fans who did not know about BW before SC2. yeap .. those were dime a dozen back then. you won't see them now because SC2 fans is getting their own tons of trouble.

On October 10 2013 01:45 JustPassingBy wrote:


Eh, I wouldn't say that. Actually I don't see how the sc2 community is significantly worse than any other (e)Sport community out there. Care to name a few examples? :-/

The Orb incidence would've happened like that in any other community, in my opinion. Every community absolutely hates being lied to, especially from people who do it to talk down some mistake they did (take for example the former German minister of defense and his copied phd thesis).

On October 09 2013 23:03 TheWorldToCome wrote:
It's missing exciting units that BW had: Reaver, Lurker, Spider Mine (although I guess widow mine kinda replaces)

Seeing a reaver shoot a scarab into a line of probes and holding your breath waiting to see if it would explode or be a dud was exciting as hell.

Lurkers were just great units in many ways, as well as the hold position trick where you could lure a pack of MM into a trap and just rape them was great.

On October 10 2013 06:48 lowercase wrote:


Reaver duds weren't part of the game design - you could argue Blizz would have liked to have fixed that bug, but it ended up being exciting. One of the problems with SC2 is there aren't any chance effects. Even high-ground advantage in BW meant a miss chance for units firing from below, something removed in SC2.

Biggest problems, in my opinon, for SC2 are unit clumping (obviously), and a few really terrible units like the Colossus and Marauder. Warpgate also needs a nerf, as well as force fields.

Lurkers were SO much better than swarm hosts, but Blizz is really crippled with their "we're not going to copy BW" attitude. It's unfortunate, but they're so afraid of being in the shadow of their old game they refuse to learn from it. Abilities like FF, fungal, and concussive shell just rob talented players of their ability to micro, and I would love it if they were removed from the game.

On October 09 2013 23:03 TheWorldToCome wrote:
It's missing exciting units that BW had: Reaver, Lurker, Spider Mine (although I guess widow mine kinda replaces)

Seeing a reaver shoot a scarab into a line of probes and holding your breath waiting to see if it would explode or be a dud was exciting as hell.

Lurkers were just great units in many ways, as well as the hold position trick where you could lure a pack of MM into a trap and just rape them was great.

On October 09 2013 23:43 XaCez wrote:
People expected SC2 to take over the world in the same way that BW took over Korea. Once people realized that wouldn't happen they turned their attention towards talking shit about other games (mostly LoL) and stopped caring about SC2, subsequently becoming overprotective of its legitimacy as a sport (Orb witch hunt among others). Of course, Blizzard also dropped the ball on a lot of things, but the community did its share as well.

On October 09 2013 23:03 TheWorldToCome wrote:
It's missing exciting units that BW had: Reaver, Lurker, Spider Mine (although I guess widow mine kinda replaces)

Seeing a reaver shoot a scarab into a line of probes and holding your breath waiting to see if it would explode or be a dud was exciting as hell.

Lurkers were just great units in many ways, as well as the hold position trick where you could lure a pack of MM into a trap and just rape them was great.

On October 10 2013 14:20 tree.hugger wrote:

I agree with this guy. Sc2 units, minus the baneling and the units ported from BW (Siege tank, mines) are all really boring.

On October 10 2013 15:25 Rabiator wrote:

The units are only boring because "everything is special" and as a consequence special becomes normal. If there was no smartcast any Fungal Growth would be exciting, because there would be far fewer of them, but to combat the massive numbers of units clumped up you have to have smartcast activated. The same holds true for Forcefield and EMP and Psi Storm. Just look at EMP in BW for example and you see that it simply couldnt be used to "blanket a Protoss army" because it was part of the Science Vessel spells and thus there werent as many casters. The same is true for Feedback, which the Dark Archon - which no one got - had.

So to make units exciting they need to become "more special" and thus less frequently used, much harder to use AND more powerful. The Lurker has been added to the campaign and you can compare those SC2 stats to the BW stats to see how it would "have to be treated" to make it acceptable for SC2. It would become weak and boring and the same has happened to the other units that have already been "converted to SC2" ... and the reason is simply the stupid perfect unit pathing and unlimited unit selection, which the devs thought necessary for the game. Get rid of those two and you have a more exciting game where you can allow "locally overpowered units" to exist.

On October 10 2013 16:46 USvBleakill wrote:


I kinda agree with this post, but it shows greatly that this is not that easy then a lot of people argue.

You say that it would be better if SC2 would be harder to play with cutting smartcast unlimited unit selection and pathing. You say it would be a higher skill cap and we could really appreciate the "amazing fungals" in pro games and you are kind of right.

The point were the rat bites his tail is that a lot of people claim the success on LoL and Dota that they have a huge player base. But the thing is this player base are mostly casuals that play the MOBA games because they are team games and relatively easy to understand and execute.

You just cannot sell a game no matter if it is ftp or 50 bucks with things like limited unit selection, no waypoints and weird unit movement in 2013. Testing magazines or websides would destory that game and saying "well its kinda cool but it has controles from times were our main audience was 3 feet tall."

On October 10 2013 16:46 USvBleakill wrote:


I kinda agree with this post, but it shows greatly that this is not that easy then a lot of people argue.

You say that it would be better if SC2 would be harder to play with cutting smartcast unlimited unit selection and pathing. You say it would be a higher skill cap and we could really appreciate the "amazing fungals" in pro games and you are kind of right.

The point were the rat bites his tail is that a lot of people claim the success on LoL and Dota that they have a huge player base. But the thing is this player base are mostly casuals that play the MOBA games because they are team games and relatively easy to understand and execute.

You just cannot sell a game no matter if it is ftp or 50 bucks with things like limited unit selection, no waypoints and weird unit movement in 2013. Testing magazines or websides would destory that game and saying "well its kinda cool but it has controles from times were our main audience was 3 feet tall."

On October 10 2013 16:56 MikeMM wrote:

The solution is quite simple.
Only GM players and progamers should play on harder settings.

On October 10 2013 17:27 ETisME wrote:

and do you think people would prefer to watch a more difficult to play game in which it looks the same except you know it is more difficult but the overall gameplay would look worse than a high master game?