On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
Well the game is stagnant for too much time...
No growth in viewership No changes in the metagame
And it's not good news for RTS... So everybody is starting to call for the end of SC2.
On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
Well, everyone kinda gets tired from WCS all day every day. But yeah, there is more shouting about dead game, rather than facts that game is indeed dead, apart from few players retiring (and who the hell knows reasons behind this).
On October 01 2013 16:38 ETisME wrote: Different strategies from usual bio mine? like what? Getting a 3rd CC or before after doing a 1-1 timing? adding some marauders into the mix? Are you saying bio mine is weaker than mech in early and late game, ONLY strong in mid game? Bio mine is stronger than mech in every single phrase other than maybe late late game.
Think of other build instead of lingbanelingmuta? Using your own sentences, "they can't use units that aren't worth the investment". roach hydra just has a much smaller win rate and is a lot more map dependant than ling baneling muta. Zerg uses ling baneling muta is because it is the best optimal build against bio mine compared to other viable unit composition.
I am using ZvZ as the example on how Zerg needs to micro because you yourself said "the average zerg isn't used to microing or anything of sorts". Well, ok, ZvT then. Zerg split baneling against split bio is not micro. Zerg using infestors is not micro, Zerg using muta to magic box is not micro, Zerg sniping with muta is not micro, Zerg using burrow landmine is not micro, Zerg flank is not micro, zerg creep spread onto T's 4th is not micro, Zerg burrow to deny expo is not micro. I guess you and I have a very different perception on what is micro then or you think splitting bio is the only micro in the game.
And you misunderstand my point. The punishment should be punished by the T player, not an automatic AI targetting shot.
I've seen terrans use banshees, Ravens, do more mine drops, Hellion reaper openings, and.. Hmm can't seem to think of too many more compositions that I've recently seen (It is quite a rare case tbh.). Though the ''strategies'' entail timings, and other things like that as well, not just composition. Bio-mine is ofc stronger than mech in both early and mid game. But in the late game it IS weak compared to a mech army. Roach Hydra destroys bio mine. The reason it has a smaller win ratio is because the terran usually goes for tanks to counter it. Terran can't stay on bio-mine if the zerg changes things up. And you're saying that ''lingblingmuta'' is a strong comp against bio mine? In what world? Sure it's great for harassing and keeping the Terran back, but in a straight on engagement, Bio-mine destroys lingblingmuta. And that's why you also see tons of games where the late-game zerg who hasn't transitioned into ultra-infestor or any high tier units, will lose. Even though it would seem that the Zerg had the ''upper hand''. So let me tell you a secret why terran goes for Bio-mine. It's the only comp that is efficient against Lingblingmuta. If the zerg isn't ready to change compositions, the terran also can't change compositions. Terran has practically no efficient compsition other than bio-mine (You can add in a few banshees, ravens, tanks or what-not, but the core of the army always needs to be bio-mine.), to beat lingblingmuta. And you yourself agreed that lingblingmuta is the ''best'' composition even though most of that specific comp CAN be destroyed by widowmines? Doesn't that mean that the widowmines AREN'T the threat to change your build against? Splitting banelings into 2 groups? Oh geez, it's not like the terran needs to split the mines individually, split the bio army into more than 6-7 groups. Muta magicboxing is only done at the highest skill level, and it's almost never done in ZvT. Zerg creep spread is MACRO fyi. Kinda sad seeing you call ''zerg burrow to deny expo is micro'', ''Fungals are micro'' '' or ''burrow baneling is micro''.. Those things don't even deserve to be called micro.. Flanking is pretty much the same as controlling 2 groups and sending them to attack. Sure it requires good positioning and planning, I'll give you that, but the profit from the flanking is far higher than it should be. The terran army just dies with a good baneling flank. 10 banelings from the back can kill a 70 supply worth of terran units if he didn't maintain a good split (And the terran still needs to kill the banelings rolling in from the front.).
And banelings controlled by an ''A+Move'' isn't the same as an ''automatic shot''? Microing mines to burrow them apart from each other is pretty much the same as making 2 groups of banelings to attack from different sides (I'd even say that it takes more time to split up mines than to split up the banelings.)
So let me pull this together. Mines are situational units with 0 mobility (unless you get the upgrade.). They can be killed cost effectively by every race if they have vision and the correct units (For example swarmhosts, mutas, hydras, roaches, banelings, queens, ultras, infestors, etc.). They have a huge cd after each shot, so they're the same as an baneling (As in 1 shot per engagement.), and their AoE is smaller than a baneling. + they also have friendly fire on, and there have been a TON of cases where the friendly fire has done far more damage to the terran army, than the zerg. + Like the baneling, the mines can die before exploding on the enemies.
banshee play isn't in main meta hellion reaper had always existed ever since beta raven, well I can't remember when was the last time I saw a raven in TvZ power wise, you are right on Mech > Bio mine. But you are forgetting bio mine makes zerg late game weak due to the superior economy and zerg cannot go 90 drones into hive units. counter wise, zerg has a lot more options against mech than bio mine. So it isn't right to say Bio mine is weaker than mech in late game unless you are talking about zerg being able to get a superior economy fast and able to go ultra and broodlords before Terran economy allows all kind of viking/marauder transition And yes, muta ling baneling has the highest win rate against bio mine. Did you not read thedwf or naruto keep complaining how a 2-2 zerg ling baneling muta can beat a 3-3 bio mine? It just takes "skill and micro" as they would call it. as for those actions are not micro. well if that isn't micro, what is that? only stutterstepping and spreading and target firing counts as micro now? How about Zerg spreading banelings to follow T bio and baiting mines while using muta sniping mines and medivacs? burrow banelings alone takes more skill to position (to avoid getting scanned) and actually killing the units requires more attention than a widow mine. And 10 banelings can kill 70 supply of marines. one widow mine can blow up 15 banelings without any attention from T and banelings even cost gas to make. and no, banelings controls are not a move, you actually have to split them to follow the split bio. saying that is a move is just saying spreading bio is a move lol and it's funny how you put all those units as counter. yes, because we all know swarmhost, queen and hydras are totally viable in ZvT engagement. and are you seriously complaining about friendly fire when medivacs are easier to keep alive and able to heal up the marines while widow mine one shotting a group of banelings which effectively is only counter to marines?
I must admit that I'd love the balance team to, after the off-season patch, leave the game untouched until LotV and let it evolve naturally. I'm ready to bet that one would be amazed at the builds, strategies and innovations which would come out of this.
On October 01 2013 22:40 [PkF] Wire wrote: I must admit that I'd love the balance team to, after the off-season patch, leave the game untouched until LotV and let it evolve naturally. I'm ready to bet that one would be amazed at the builds, strategies and innovations which would come out of this.
That nobody would ever use, because players are lazy and only do stuff that works for them.
The balance team left it alone for the past months and the game got stale pretty fast. It's a design issue, not a balance one. David Kim is doing his best to maintain interest but Dustin Bowder is to blame for the current design issues.
On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
The "game is dying and Blizzard sucks and can't fix it" narrative is a lot more "exciting" and "interesting" than the much more realistic "the game has about reached equilibrium in terms of player and fan base, and is not longer going to be the biggest esport" narrative.
Basically it is a lot more "internet fun" to be negative and ridiculously pessimistic, rather than realize the mediocrity of the RTS scene within the context of the greater esports or even video game scene.
The changes to the game, even if patches have slowed down significantly, hurt the story line. I will cite the last 2 players who were truly dominant, Life and Innovation. Their reign of dominance was not ended with players learning how to play against their style, but rather because there was a change in the game. Life was in the middle of his run then HotS came out. While that was more of just bad timing, we can simply sweep the end of his reign under the rug as a by-product of the release of the expansion. It is the same with Innovation. He was so dominant. It was exciting for a while as Soulkey was able to beat him in incredible fashion during the WCS KR S1 finals. That is what makes the game exciting. The story line of how Soulkey beat the top player in exciting fashion. It remained exciting following the S1 Finals as Innovation redeemed himself and showed that he is truly the best in the world.
Alas, it was not to last as the Hellbat was nerfed and while it is still surprising to see Innovation lose, it is so so easy to simply say "well, he hasn't been as good since that hellbat nerf". Not exciting at all.
On October 01 2013 22:29 ETisME wrote: banshee play isn't in main meta hellion reaper had always existed ever since beta raven, well I can't remember when was the last time I saw a raven in TvZ power wise, you are right on Mech > Bio mine. But you are forgetting bio mine makes zerg late game weak due to the superior economy and zerg cannot go 90 drones into hive units. counter wise, zerg has a lot more options against mech than bio mine. So it isn't right to say Bio mine is weaker than mech in late game unless you are talking about zerg being able to get a superior economy fast and able to go ultra and broodlords before Terran economy allows all kind of viking/marauder transition And yes, muta ling baneling has the highest win rate against bio mine. Did you not read thedwf or naruto keep complaining how a 2-2 zerg ling baneling muta can beat a 3-3 bio mine? It just takes "skill and micro" as they would call it. as for those actions are not micro. well if that isn't micro, what is that? only stutterstepping and spreading and target firing counts as micro now? How about Zerg spreading banelings to follow T bio and baiting mines while using muta sniping mines and medivacs? burrow banelings alone takes more skill to position (to avoid getting scanned) and actually killing the units requires more attention than a widow mine. And 10 banelings can kill 70 supply of marines. one widow mine can blow up 15 banelings without any attention from T and banelings even cost gas to make. and no, banelings controls are not a move, you actually have to split them to follow the split bio. saying that is a move is just saying spreading bio is a move lol and it's funny how you put all those units as counter. yes, because we all know swarmhost, queen and hydras are totally viable in ZvT engagement. and are you seriously complaining about friendly fire when medivacs are easier to keep alive and able to heal up the marines while widow mine one shotting a group of banelings which effectively is only counter to marines?
I've never seen a zerg split the banelings to follow each group that the terran splits into. The most I've seen is zerg splitting the banelings into 3. 1 for flank, and the main baneling force into 2. Never have I seen zerg split the banelings so that they would follow each terran bio-group. Marauder transition is almost impossible if the zerg manages to get out some infestors with the ultras. Ultras will actually kill off the marauders if the terran can't kite with the marauders, which is why mixing up a few infestors with the ultras will actually be incredible. It all depends on how aggressive the terran is. If the terran is extremely aggressive reaching 90 drones is impossible, but keeping the terran on 2 bases will make the terran run dry after some aggression. Bio-mine is a composition that is only strong if the terran army has good splits, a good balanced composition. But it will die like any terran bio army cause of the ''OP banelings''. FYI: You contradicted yourself. You said that ''Mines are OP'' while also claiming that ''Zerg can win with 2/2 lingblingmuta against a 3/3 bio-mine.''.. So what the hell is the issue?! The mines are ''op'' but you can win with a huge upgrade disadvantage on equal grounds (If the match wasn't on equal grounds you wouldn't have brought it as an example, right?)? As much as I know the zergs are currently doing better than the terrans in the competitive scene. Although currently I've noticed that about 50% of the Ro16 races in pretty much, in each tourney, are protoss.
I'm not saying that Zerg isn't a race that can't benefit from Micro, what I'm saying is that zerg usually DOESN'T micro too much compared to the terran. For example I think that the pros who roll their banelings over mines without detection, is actually proof that they don't bother microing too much, and rather just smash their forces into the enemy (Not saying that they don't micro at all, the zergs usually like to do flanks and good concaves, but their splitting is of far smaller scale than what terran usually does, which is limited to 3-4 unit groups..)
The reason why terrans use mines is because they have no other option THAT is why we use mines. Not because they're ''op''. Instead of nerfing the mines to the ground and buffing an alternative, like David Kim is intending to do, they should keep both the option of ''should I go for tanks'', ''should i go for widowmines'' or ''should I go for tanks AND widowmines''. Instead of the plan to nerf one thing to make players use another thing. That's an fundamentally wrong way of thinking.
And I'm not insulting the Pro zerg players. Zerg is a hard race to play for different reasons than why a terran is a hard race. Zerg has the hardest macro mechanics from the 3 races. Zerg is all about quick, decisive decision making, and constant map presence, and macro. Just try playing terran, and experience things for yourself. That's the quickest way to understand what I'm talking about.
On October 01 2013 13:59 Brian333 wrote: Oov has some good points, but I think he's just as biased as anyone and it really shows through in what he says.
Yea, progamers should endure, they should try their hardest to deal with the meta-game. They should innovate, look for new strategies and tactics that counter existing ones and push forward the game. But, at the end of the day, they have their motivations as does Oov and David Kim and it's hard to say anyone is right. Just look at Bisu's recent interview where he talks about how hard it is to see the fans disappear, how difficult it becomes to just focus on your practice when you have to question what the purpose is. And, how do you bring those fans back? Make the game harder? Get rid of MBS, auto-mining, and bring back BW unit pathing? As LoL proved, the technical difficulty of the game is not related to the popularity of the game in such a direct way. Are constant patches and changes a bad thing? Does it not happen in other incredibly popular games?
If someone knew how to turn a video-game into a national sport, they would be getting paid an unbelievable amount of money to do so. Nobody knows and I'd say that's because there is no tangible answer.
BW was closest to that answer til Blizzard pulled the plug. The idea at the time of pre-SC2 release was that SC2 was supposed to assume the mantle of BW because the latter had things that were lacking e.g. arcahic B.net UI, graphics etc It was a perfect opportunity to add and build upon what I saw as a strong foundation (a perfect opportunity to update the game). It was the game to carry the 10 years of starcraft and all its glory.
Yet they went ahead and destroyed the foundation where the game was basically living off the BW popularity. Same thing happened with D3. No chat channels? no PvP? Everything that made starcraft through the original game and its expansion so awesome was a shell of its former self from game play, single player, story development and even ghost.net 2.0.
Except BW was clearly on a decline before Blizzard pulled the plug and I don't think anyone thought it was going to last. Problems such as STX's withdrawal from SC2 didn't suddenly happen. It would've happened regardless of if they were playing SC2 or BW. The truth is LoL is anything but BW and yet it's more popular now than BW is. If you're trying to tell me that an updated UI and graphics are what was needed to make BW more popular than LoL, then it goes back to my earlier point. There is nothing to suggest a face-lifted BW is going to work.
Its decline was mainly due to the imminent release of SC2 around 2010. Then Blizzard just randomly shows up after all these years and starts a lawsuit over KeSPA and its illegal use of BW. There was far too much negativity surrounding Blizzard and its actions toward BW. They indirectly killed MBCgames and the fabled MSL. They ignored OGN and KeSPA while riding on the 10 years of popularity built by them. They gave GOM, an ametuer organisation (to the korean viewers - also refer to the GOM classics) when it came to starleagues (and rival I suppose to the big two) during that time the broadcasting rights. No SC2 from the major broadcasting stations especially the legendary OGN and constant threats of pulling the plug on BW by one and only Blizzard. It was literally doom and gloom across multiple korean starcraft forums. But the damage was done here and thats why HOTS is having so much trouble taking off while WoL never took off among the casuals and fans.
If SC2 did not exist, BW still do this day would be huge in Korea. It would still be the same with some fluctuation. I can see BW vs LoL being more of an even playing field in Korea. Thats the difference. SC2 brought in a huge foreign scene thanks to the game being easier, more updated in terms of graphics and what not.. however it is clearly deteriorating the korean starcraft scene from a progamer and fan perspective. It was saddening to see literally 5 people turn up to watch the proleague... Ive been there several times and it was ALWAYS packed with fan girls always cheering for their favorite team/players, starting the countdown for every match.
Of course LoL is more popular than BW. The BW scene is buried in peace now. But just wind back to 2010, the release year for SC2. This is when Korean Air OSL Finals between Flash vs Effort took place. Just look at the crowd. BW could have been on a decline.. but it was no way shape or form going to die out just like that. If Bisu made it to an OSL final, i cannot fathom how fast the seats would have filled up. I repeat, if Bisu made it to an OSL finals the world would have exploded. I would eat a hat if less people turned up for this final than the korean air osl finals. No LoL tournament would out match this in any way shape or form in terms of viewership, crowds, cheers w/e.
People need to realise that its the korean scene that is deteriorating fast, not the foreign scene. As for what would happen if the Korean scene collapses all together, I don't know. Maybe more determined players will go over to EU/US to play? Fact of the matter is that starcraft is in a really dire state in Korea. If BW rose from the grave in Korea, it would instantly overtake SC2 popularity over there (with alot of retired players coming back). There is not a single shred of a doubt about this..
All I see here are excuses. I'll make it simple for you. If BW was strong enough, Blizzard wouldn't have been able to kill it and SC2 wouldn't have had any influence on it. The problem is it was in a state of decline with no real future and that opened the door for those events to happen. So again, back to my original point, BW in the past was that answer but it was not the answer going forward. People change. Society changes. Trends change. BW was the right game at the right time. LoL, a game that is very different from BW, is apparently the right game for these times.
Man I find this very hard to believe....The reality is the Market was so Primed for a good sc2 that reminded them of BW with the depth but be an improvement with graphics and modernize it in a way with new units but keep the old BW idea of creating an atmosphere where watching pros play just puts you in sheer awe.... yet is still fun to play in the aspect of aspiring to play like them and do amazing feats that would make you proud of yourself for accomplishing it..... In came 2010 and sc2 and tons were disappointed.....
Will say it again , when you got something working , you don't change it , you just change some stuff and add more .
Just like when something work , why change it ? You IMPROVE IT !!!
GTA ? New game out = they keep the ground , assassins creed ? Same , call of duty ? Same .
broodwar was , still , the BEST RTS EVER MADE , the only thing bad about the game are the graphic and also because It lacks the feature of the new rts game.
honestly that not far off from saying any pro gamer could balance the game better that david kim but again the core of the game of starcraft 2 full of failure and error ( they have realy not looked into broodwar to much )
they have make it so that one big battle who decide the game , when it fact it should be many many small battle where the best player can win with style and skill , in broodwar that just like that , in sc2 ? one fight , look away 2 ? get 3 storm in ? = GG . sorry to say ... but that not how rts should be .
other big error they did , oov say it , they have NERF ALL BUILD , UNIT , who was hard to deal with before watch , some stuft needed to be nerfed while other were fine. anyway you should alway wait 1-2 months before nerf something and be realy sure they are NO DAMN WAY to counter it.
yet these monkey trashed everything good about broodwar and have create something totaly ''new'' and called it starcraft 2......
someone should ask blizzard to release starcraft 1 HD with sc2 features , would play all my life ..... that where the money stach located blizzard , you failed .
On October 01 2013 13:59 Brian333 wrote: Oov has some good points, but I think he's just as biased as anyone and it really shows through in what he says.
Yea, progamers should endure, they should try their hardest to deal with the meta-game. They should innovate, look for new strategies and tactics that counter existing ones and push forward the game. But, at the end of the day, they have their motivations as does Oov and David Kim and it's hard to say anyone is right. Just look at Bisu's recent interview where he talks about how hard it is to see the fans disappear, how difficult it becomes to just focus on your practice when you have to question what the purpose is. And, how do you bring those fans back? Make the game harder? Get rid of MBS, auto-mining, and bring back BW unit pathing? As LoL proved, the technical difficulty of the game is not related to the popularity of the game in such a direct way. Are constant patches and changes a bad thing? Does it not happen in other incredibly popular games?
If someone knew how to turn a video-game into a national sport, they would be getting paid an unbelievable amount of money to do so. Nobody knows and I'd say that's because there is no tangible answer.
BW was closest to that answer til Blizzard pulled the plug. The idea at the time of pre-SC2 release was that SC2 was supposed to assume the mantle of BW because the latter had things that were lacking e.g. arcahic B.net UI, graphics etc It was a perfect opportunity to add and build upon what I saw as a strong foundation (a perfect opportunity to update the game). It was the game to carry the 10 years of starcraft and all its glory.
Yet they went ahead and destroyed the foundation where the game was basically living off the BW popularity. Same thing happened with D3. No chat channels? no PvP? Everything that made starcraft through the original game and its expansion so awesome was a shell of its former self from game play, single player, story development and even ghost.net 2.0.
Except BW was clearly on a decline before Blizzard pulled the plug and I don't think anyone thought it was going to last. Problems such as STX's withdrawal from SC2 didn't suddenly happen. It would've happened regardless of if they were playing SC2 or BW. The truth is LoL is anything but BW and yet it's more popular now than BW is. If you're trying to tell me that an updated UI and graphics are what was needed to make BW more popular than LoL, then it goes back to my earlier point. There is nothing to suggest a face-lifted BW is going to work.
Its decline was mainly due to the imminent release of SC2 around 2010. Then Blizzard just randomly shows up after all these years and starts a lawsuit over KeSPA and its illegal use of BW. There was far too much negativity surrounding Blizzard and its actions toward BW. They indirectly killed MBCgames and the fabled MSL. They ignored OGN and KeSPA while riding on the 10 years of popularity built by them. They gave GOM, an ametuer organisation (to the korean viewers - also refer to the GOM classics) when it came to starleagues (and rival I suppose to the big two) during that time the broadcasting rights. No SC2 from the major broadcasting stations especially the legendary OGN and constant threats of pulling the plug on BW by one and only Blizzard. It was literally doom and gloom across multiple korean starcraft forums. But the damage was done here and thats why HOTS is having so much trouble taking off while WoL never took off among the casuals and fans.
If SC2 did not exist, BW still do this day would be huge in Korea. It would still be the same with some fluctuation. I can see BW vs LoL being more of an even playing field in Korea. Thats the difference. SC2 brought in a huge foreign scene thanks to the game being easier, more updated in terms of graphics and what not.. however it is clearly deteriorating the korean starcraft scene from a progamer and fan perspective. It was saddening to see literally 5 people turn up to watch the proleague... Ive been there several times and it was ALWAYS packed with fan girls always cheering for their favorite team/players, starting the countdown for every match.
Of course LoL is more popular than BW. The BW scene is buried in peace now. But just wind back to 2010, the release year for SC2. This is when Korean Air OSL Finals between Flash vs Effort took place. Just look at the crowd. BW could have been on a decline.. but it was no way shape or form going to die out just like that. If Bisu made it to an OSL final, i cannot fathom how fast the seats would have filled up. I repeat, if Bisu made it to an OSL finals the world would have exploded. I would eat a hat if less people turned up for this final than the korean air osl finals. No LoL tournament would out match this in any way shape or form in terms of viewership, crowds, cheers w/e.
People need to realise that its the korean scene that is deteriorating fast, not the foreign scene. As for what would happen if the Korean scene collapses all together, I don't know. Maybe more determined players will go over to EU/US to play? Fact of the matter is that starcraft is in a really dire state in Korea. If BW rose from the grave in Korea, it would instantly overtake SC2 popularity over there (with alot of retired players coming back). There is not a single shred of a doubt about this..
All I see here are excuses. I'll make it simple for you. If BW was strong enough, Blizzard wouldn't have been able to kill it and SC2 wouldn't have had any influence on it. The problem is it was in a state of decline with no real future and that opened the door for those events to happen. So again, back to my original point, BW in the past was that answer but it was not the answer going forward. People change. Society changes. Trends change. BW was the right game at the right time. LoL, a game that is very different from BW, is apparently the right game for these times.
But BW didn't even die...
Streaming viewership count, BW is still more superior than SC2. If you want to talk about "Global" fans, SC2 is a rather esoteric with a few fanatics scattered in couple of countries. Overall speaking, people are still much more interested in BW than SC2.
On October 01 2013 22:29 ETisME wrote: banshee play isn't in main meta hellion reaper had always existed ever since beta raven, well I can't remember when was the last time I saw a raven in TvZ power wise, you are right on Mech > Bio mine. But you are forgetting bio mine makes zerg late game weak due to the superior economy and zerg cannot go 90 drones into hive units. counter wise, zerg has a lot more options against mech than bio mine. So it isn't right to say Bio mine is weaker than mech in late game unless you are talking about zerg being able to get a superior economy fast and able to go ultra and broodlords before Terran economy allows all kind of viking/marauder transition And yes, muta ling baneling has the highest win rate against bio mine. Did you not read thedwf or naruto keep complaining how a 2-2 zerg ling baneling muta can beat a 3-3 bio mine? It just takes "skill and micro" as they would call it. as for those actions are not micro. well if that isn't micro, what is that? only stutterstepping and spreading and target firing counts as micro now? How about Zerg spreading banelings to follow T bio and baiting mines while using muta sniping mines and medivacs? burrow banelings alone takes more skill to position (to avoid getting scanned) and actually killing the units requires more attention than a widow mine. And 10 banelings can kill 70 supply of marines. one widow mine can blow up 15 banelings without any attention from T and banelings even cost gas to make. and no, banelings controls are not a move, you actually have to split them to follow the split bio. saying that is a move is just saying spreading bio is a move lol and it's funny how you put all those units as counter. yes, because we all know swarmhost, queen and hydras are totally viable in ZvT engagement. and are you seriously complaining about friendly fire when medivacs are easier to keep alive and able to heal up the marines while widow mine one shotting a group of banelings which effectively is only counter to marines?
I've never seen a zerg split the banelings to follow each group that the terran splits into. The most I've seen is zerg splitting the banelings into 3. 1 for flank, and the main baneling force into 2. Never have I seen zerg split the banelings so that they would follow each terran bio-group. Marauder transition is almost impossible if the zerg manages to get out some infestors with the ultras. Ultras will actually kill off the marauders if the terran can't kite with the marauders, which is why mixing up a few infestors with the ultras will actually be incredible. It all depends on how aggressive the terran is. If the terran is extremely aggressive reaching 90 drones is impossible, but keeping the terran on 2 bases will make the terran run dry after some aggression. Bio-mine is a composition that is only strong if the terran army has good splits, a good balanced composition. But it will die like any terran bio army cause of the ''OP banelings''. FYI: You contradicted yourself. You said that ''Mines are OP'' while also claiming that ''Zerg can win with 2/2 lingblingmuta against a 3/3 bio-mine.''.. So what the hell is the issue?! The mines are ''op'' but you can win with a huge upgrade disadvantage on equal grounds (If the match wasn't on equal grounds you wouldn't have brought it as an example, right?)? As much as I know the zergs are currently doing better than the terrans in the competitive scene. Although currently I've noticed that about 50% of the Ro16 races in pretty much, in each tourney, are protoss.
I'm not saying that Zerg isn't a race that can't benefit from Micro, what I'm saying is that zerg usually DOESN'T micro too much compared to the terran. For example I think that the pros who roll their banelings over mines without detection, is actually proof that they don't bother microing too much, and rather just smash their forces into the enemy (Not saying that they don't micro at all, the zergs usually like to do flanks and good concaves, but their splitting is of far smaller scale than what terran usually does, which is limited to 3-4 unit groups..)
The reason why terrans use mines is because they have no other option THAT is why we use mines. Not because they're ''op''. Instead of nerfing the mines to the ground and buffing an alternative, like David Kim is intending to do, they should keep both the option of ''should I go for tanks'', ''should i go for widowmines'' or ''should I go for tanks AND widowmines''. Instead of the plan to nerf one thing to make players use another thing. That's an fundamentally wrong way of thinking.
And I'm not insulting the Pro zerg players. Zerg is a hard race to play for different reasons than why a terran is a hard race. Zerg has the hardest macro mechanics from the 3 races. Zerg is all about quick, decisive decision making, and constant map presence, and macro. Just try playing terran, and experience things for yourself. That's the quickest way to understand what I'm talking about.
what makes you think I don't play terran? I am diamond T/P/Z on NA (not random). Granted, I haven't finished any placement for this season because I just finished uni but I played a pure bio style in WoL and almost made it to master.
I never said mines are op, I said the way it operates is stupid. It shouldn't be an auto targetting unit. I personally think bio mine is super strong against ling baneling muta, but it wasn't my word who said zerg can beat bio mine with "high skill". That was coming from the terran forum pro like thedwf and naruto mainly which are also pretty terran biased.
zerg always split their banelings against bio, you need to watch zerg stream or play zerg to know it. the reason why they don't split up too much is because individual small groups of banelings get snipes too easily. zerg rolls the banelings to the mine is because first, the mine can blow up the banelings which also blows up the mines. second, you can't engage and disengage once you see the mine, once you engage and that's it. a lot of splitting from terran is pre spread, you engage with small group of marines or marauders and spread out the bio behind and then once the zerg engages, you spread even more. You only need to go through level 5 marine split challenge map to get a cost efficient trade. if mine is not nerfed, do you honestly think people would use tank against muta ling baneling?
On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
I agree with the other replies to your post , but in wc3 terms think of it like this. (this also applies to what oov was saying)
Imagine if back in 2005 David kim was working on wc3 , at the time sky was trashing every pro and noob in the globe , all of a sudden his Sky Push vs Orc and NE appears on the scene , he sees that humans are having very high success with it (which was statistically true) , David Kim would patch the game and literally obliterate that strategy within a few months of Sky's debut in WCG 2005 , the same could be said about moon's mass druid of the talon strategy vs orc , or even something more modern , Th000's mass tank + human tri hero strategy vs NE and UD
Now imagine that same thing being done every time a new strategy or meta shows up that ruins david's "statistics" would wc3 be the success it was ? I'm gonna have to say HELL NO .
To be honest we saw an imbalance not being patched for a long time at the end of WoL and all that happened in terms of adaptation was Parting's soul train. The game got more stale rather than interesting.
On October 01 2013 14:27 Spaylz wrote: I've been paying a lot of attention to the SC2 forums lately, and I have to wonder: is the game really in such a bad shape?
I'm a WC3 player, still loyal to the bone and although I bought SC2 I never liked it. It's just not fun to me in comparison to WC3. But Blizzard is investing a lot of money and effort into it, and there certainly is a decent amount of tournaments and media coverage.
However, when looking at the forums on TeamLiquid, the dwindling numbers in viewership and the lack of new tournaments in the scene, it really does seem like the game is beginning to strike out.
Is it really that bad?
Shamelessly quoting myself. I'd like someone to answer me, please
I agree with the other replies to your post , but in wc3 terms think of it like this. (this also applies to what oov was saying)
Imagine if back in 2005 David kim was working on wc3 , at the time sky was trashing every pro and noob in the globe , all of a sudden his Sky Push vs Orc and NE appears on the scene , he sees that humans are having very high success with it (which was statistically true) , David Kim would patch the game and literally obliterate that strategy within a few months of Sky's debut in WCG 2005 , the same could be said about moon's mass druid of the talon strategy vs orc , or even something more modern , Th000's mass tank + human tri hero strategy vs NE and UD
Now imagine that same thing being done every time a new strategy or meta shows up that ruins david's "statistics" would wc3 be the success it was ? I'm gonna have to say HELL NO .
Truth be told I'm not familiar with how they balance SC2. People do seem to say all they do is nuke successful strategies into the ground, simply because Blizzard thinks the metagame should be ever changing. Which it should really, but not because Blizzard makes certain tactics obsolete.
In WC3, the strategies weren't that numerous either. If you played against an Orc you pretty much knew what he was gonna do. Strategies evolved over time and some were the result of very ingenious play (think TH000's Paladin first against UD) and some were simply the result of common sense (as in the best option for Orc actually was to go grunt/raider/sw and stack claws on BM). But overall, the strategies didn't vary too much but that didn't really affect the quality of the game somehow, as the entertainment value of any WC3 game was the sheer exchange between players and the displays of micros and "big plays". The game had flaws for sure, it could have used a little more variety, a little more balance and a whole lot less RNG.
In either case, I don't see Blizzard steering away from using David Kim as the main balance designer, and I don't foresee any major overhaul in LotV. I just don't think Blizzard has the guts to do that.
EPT
