|
On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take.
Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate.
|
yeah, I just watched the KotH, definitely NOT the VoD you want to send someone to get them interested in StarBow :X
|
On August 20 2014 01:22 404AlphaSquad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take. Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate.
Let me explain to whole Starbow community and you two especially how pro gaming works. Pro player finds a strategy that's easy to execute, that other's don't know how to deal with it and use it against their opponents to win. Yes, to win because pro players don't give a crap if it's fun or annoying, pro players play to win.
If you two found my mech style boring, did you ever watch BW games TvZ with mech? Obviously not, because that's how mech TvZ looked like.
It's not my fault reapers were imbalanced and I found that out day before the match and I decided to use it because they were too strong. Game got patched and I played bio against zerg, why? I thought my play style was camping and boring and annoying, but I played bio while attacking all the time? What happened? Playing bio against zerg and attacking a lot is the best play style right now and has highest chance of giving me a win.
EDIT: and yes the Bo5 was not worth watching, because let's be honest games sucked, but again there's no reason for me to play strategy that's inferior to reaper opening, just because reapers aren't "fun". I play to win.
|
On August 20 2014 02:48 Beastyqt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2014 01:22 404AlphaSquad wrote:On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take. Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate. Let me explain to whole Starbow community and you two especially how pro gaming works. Pro player finds a strategy that's easy to execute, that other's don't know how to deal with it and use it against their opponents to win. Yes, to win because pro players don't give a crap if it's fun or annoying, pro players play to win. If you two found my mech style boring, did you ever watch BW games TvZ with mech? Obviously not, because that's how mech TvZ looked like. It's not my fault reapers were imbalanced and I found that out day before the match and I decided to use it because they were too strong. Game got patched and I played bio against zerg, why? I thought my play style was camping and boring and annoying, but I played bio while attacking all the time? What happened? Playing bio against zerg and attacking a lot is the best play style right now and has highest chance of giving me a win. EDIT: and yes the Bo5 was not worth watching, because let's be honest games sucked, but again there's no reason for me to play strategy that's inferior to reaper opening, just because reapers aren't "fun". I play to win.
Tbh, I disliked your play style even when you played bio. 
But it's fair enough. It's just a pity that it's so inevitable, there is hardly any guarantee for optimal strategies to be interesting to watch. The best guarantee you can get is to find very experienced and well matched players, but starbow isn't there yet.
|
Maybe instead of attacking the players for being boring, people should criticize the game for not encouraging more exciting play through good design?
|
On August 20 2014 02:48 Beastyqt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2014 01:22 404AlphaSquad wrote:On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take. Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate. Let me explain to whole Starbow community and you two especially how pro gaming works. Pro player finds a strategy that's easy to execute, that other's don't know how to deal with it and use it against their opponents to win. Yes, to win because pro players don't give a crap if it's fun or annoying, pro players play to win. If you two found my mech style boring, did you ever watch BW games TvZ with mech? Obviously not, because that's how mech TvZ looked like. It's not my fault reapers were imbalanced and I found that out day before the match and I decided to use it because they were too strong. Game got patched and I played bio against zerg, why? I thought my play style was camping and boring and annoying, but I played bio while attacking all the time? What happened? Playing bio against zerg and attacking a lot is the best play style right now and has highest chance of giving me a win. EDIT: and yes the Bo5 was not worth watching, because let's be honest games sucked, but again there's no reason for me to play strategy that's inferior to reaper opening, just because reapers aren't "fun". I play to win.
If you meant me I apologize for poor wording. I dont say that you should have played otherwise, I would have done the same thing. the "yeah" was more directed at Kalevi for pointing out that it was a good decision that some of it got patched.
Personally I like your turtly play and wish I could pull it off, but with the Reapergames I just meant to say that this Bo5 is not the best option to show new people what Sbow is about.
So, this wasnt directed at you at all and I definitely was not attacking you.
|
Idk, I actually liked the mech game on FS.
It was how mech was suppose to be played out (minus the BCs). If Beastyqt went for more drops on Franc's bases with Tanks and drops and did more turret/mine placement on the map, I think that would have been more cost efficient. It would also be more exciting and action-oriented. I think Beastyqt thought that he could defend, defend, and then expand. Rinse and repeat until Zerg slowly loses ground.
|
Going to cast some games now. Some bio TvP and rsvp vs Franscar from the loser's match in group B form the Starbow ladder cup finals.
http://www.twitch.tv/sc2_starbow
I'll keep casting other games as well if I have time 
|
On August 20 2014 03:21 Xiphos wrote:
Idk, I actually liked the mech game on FS.
It was how mech was suppose to be played out (minus the BCs). If Beastyqt went for more drops on Franc's bases with Tanks and drops and did more turret/mine placement on the map, I think that would have been more cost efficient. It would also be more exciting and action-oriented. I think Beastyqt thought that he could defend, defend, and then expand. Rinse and repeat until Zerg slowly loses ground.
the game on FS was the best one in that bo5, even though I'm terran I wanted to see if and how Franscar could break Beastys defense.
|
I think you guys should know that SB haven't even reached the potential of the level of the plays.
So far, we have only been watching your standard build -> poke there and there -> engage a bit -> huge fight -> smaller fight for retreat -> over.
When SB gets released in Korea, the organizers could message your Bisu, Killer, and Sea to try out on SB.
The games NEEDS to be first figured out before you call it boring. The reaper might be good, but give it enough time and the Zerg can figure out a viable counter and then completely shut it down and then it is up for the Terran player to find other contingency plans.
Early BW was exactly like this with tons of all-ins by BoxeR, extremely one-sided game until the other races found counters and the game quality drastically improved with knife edge executions and all the matchups are clearly defined optimally. StarBow, so far, no offence to the players, haven't exactly reached that stage yet. But I'm fully confident that once everything is worked out and the game is out of "beta", it will be better received.
|
On August 20 2014 03:21 Daumen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2014 02:48 Beastyqt wrote:On August 20 2014 01:22 404AlphaSquad wrote:On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take. Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate. Let me explain to whole Starbow community and you two especially how pro gaming works. Pro player finds a strategy that's easy to execute, that other's don't know how to deal with it and use it against their opponents to win. Yes, to win because pro players don't give a crap if it's fun or annoying, pro players play to win. If you two found my mech style boring, did you ever watch BW games TvZ with mech? Obviously not, because that's how mech TvZ looked like. It's not my fault reapers were imbalanced and I found that out day before the match and I decided to use it because they were too strong. Game got patched and I played bio against zerg, why? I thought my play style was camping and boring and annoying, but I played bio while attacking all the time? What happened? Playing bio against zerg and attacking a lot is the best play style right now and has highest chance of giving me a win. EDIT: and yes the Bo5 was not worth watching, because let's be honest games sucked, but again there's no reason for me to play strategy that's inferior to reaper opening, just because reapers aren't "fun". I play to win. If you meant me I apologize for poor wording. I dont say that you should have played otherwise, I would have done the same thing. the "yeah" was more directed at Kalevi for pointing out that it was a good decision that some of it got patched. Personally I like your turtly play and wish I could pull it off, but with the Reapergames I just meant to say that this Bo5 is not the best option to show new people what Sbow is about. So, this wasnt directed at you at all and I definitely was not attacking you.
Nono, didn't mean anything bad for you I agree with you, the bo5 was not worth watching vs Franscar.
|
On August 20 2014 03:34 Xiphos wrote:
I think you guys should know that SB haven't even reached the potential of the level of the plays.
So far, we have only been watching your standard build -> poke there and there -> engage a bit -> huge fight -> smaller fight for retreat -> over.
When SB gets released in Korea, the organizers could message your Bisu, Killer, and Sea to try out on SB.
The games NEEDS to be first figured out before you call it boring. The reaper might be good, but give it enough time and the Zerg can figure out a viable counter and then completely shut it down and then it is up for the Terran player to find other contingency plans.
Early BW was exactly like this with tons of all-ins by BoxeR, extremely one-sided game until the other races found counters and the game quality drastically improved with knife edge executions and all the matchups are clearly defined optimally. StarBow, so far, no offence to the players, haven't exactly reached that stage yet. But I'm fully confident that once everything is worked out and the game is out of "beta", it will be better received.
I agree with you, Starbow is not even out that long plus the number of players playing Starbow and SC2/SC1 isn't even close. In order to figure out the game you need A LOT of games played, not to mention you need absolutely best players to figure the game out as well and Starbow doesn't have either of those.
Look at games of SC2 and SC1 first 2 years, they look like a joke
People expect way too much I think, i'm not even pro player anymore and the rest of the top Starbow players were not pro players, you cannot expect proleague from BW quality games, even though BW and Starbow are similar.
Just enjoy the game, but you have to realize that there's probably more overpowered things like reapers were, we just haven't figured them out yet!
|
I have zero problem with beasty's style. I'm like artosis that way, I love any kind of mech play (except vs swarmhosts, even I draw the line somewhere), and I don't find it boring at all.
|
Regarding high level play, I used to only follow the Replay of the Day scene in Warcraft and I would never exactly bother with the burgeoning pro scene. The reason is that pro level play in Warcraft 3 is not necessarily that much more impressive to watch than that of a mere gifted amateur. On the other hand, the pro games would often have repetitive 'optimal'* strategies that were in the process of being figured out or patched, and which might ultimately lead to more complex and intriguing games, but which for the time being were rather boring.
*when I say optimal I don't mean the best possible strategy, just the best one to for a progamer to use right now.
I think you can compare the Warcraft 3 scene to chess: up to a point amateur chess is boring to watch because it consists only of blunders and there is nothing meaningful about the games, but once you get to a certain level the quality starts to be high enough that virtually all games are potentially interesting, and from that point the quality of the game is more dependent on fate, i.e. arbitrary factors like personal style and the happenstance of stumbling upon interesting positions.
The WC3 scene never really reached the critical point where the top players became so impressive that their games were far and away more interesting than those of amateurs. However, I think that for the Starcraft family of games this is rather different. For one, the level of play is not only much higher, but the skill difference between the top players and the lower ranked ones is much more noticeable.
I think that for Starbow there are three problems:
- players are not as experienced with the game yet leading to many one-sided games that display bad judgement
- the viewers are used to crisp execution both from pro brood war and starcraft 2 games
- game quality is dependent on better execution since that allows more drops and army movements and such
I don't think there's any good solution, it's not ideal to switch to a RotD-type system where you merely highlight interesting games, because high level play typically is not only more interesting, but in high demand because it's where the expectations of the viewers lie. Yet these players don't exist (yet).
|
This is a very good discussion btw and I 100% agree with the fact that Starbow is fairly unexplored.
However, the game has already been patched since these games were played (he casted from replays AND there was quite some time between his cast until the VOD came up), so now the ground mech upgrades are separated from airt mech upgrades which indirectly means that beastyqt's mech style that goes quick into air is less viable now than when they played.
Also, and I think we all agree here, reaper upgrade is actually pushed to armory tech (it was suppose to be a mid/late game upgrade) so they should rarely be able to end games by themselves anymore.
|
On August 20 2014 02:48 Beastyqt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2014 01:22 404AlphaSquad wrote:On August 20 2014 01:16 Grumbels wrote:
Beastyqt is one of the most infuriatingly boring players to watch, I thought this in sc2 already and it's even more true in starbow.
Also, players aren't good enough yet for these large maps imo. If we accept that 1) in starbow the mechanical requirements scale with the number of bases to a higher degree than sc2; and that 2) players getting massive 7k banks as a general rule represents a degenerate case, and 3) that maps only became larger in bw and sc2 when the pro scene was already established, then I think the natural conclusion is that we need more smaller maps, where third and fourth base are more difficult to take. Beastyqt´s playstyle is so annoying. And I am glad we patched some of the stuff we saw in these games, because not only was it horribly designed but also annoying to play/spectate. Let me explain to whole Starbow community and you two especially how pro gaming works. Pro player finds a strategy that's easy to execute, that other's don't know how to deal with it and use it against their opponents to win. Yes, to win because pro players don't give a crap if it's fun or annoying, pro players play to win. If you two found my mech style boring, did you ever watch BW games TvZ with mech? Obviously not, because that's how mech TvZ looked like. It's not my fault reapers were imbalanced and I found that out day before the match and I decided to use it because they were too strong. Game got patched and I played bio against zerg, why? I thought my play style was camping and boring and annoying, but I played bio while attacking all the time? What happened? Playing bio against zerg and attacking a lot is the best play style right now and has highest chance of giving me a win. EDIT: and yes the Bo5 was not worth watching, because let's be honest games sucked, but again there's no reason for me to play strategy that's inferior to reaper opening, just because reapers aren't "fun". I play to win.
Do you think I am retarded? Ofc Progamers play what it is good and wins them games. Reapers at this point were just silly as shit, and it was universally accepted that reapers were horribly designed and Zerg IS not able to deal with them. (Fact!) And yes I did watch SCBW mech, and I hardly saw games on FS where Mech just turtled 30 Minutes on three bases and went 12+BC with 3+3. That has alot to do with the combined mech/air upgrades and the early game advantage you get from playing reapers if you not already win the game with them. I dont blame you for the slightest for playing reapers or having this style of play, just like I dont blame morrow for playing reapers in early WOL, because thats how Progaming works. However I am entitled to say that its fracking broing to watch/play and I am glad we patched most of this out of the game.
|
However, the game has already been patched since these games were played (he casted from replays AND there was quite some time between his cast until the VOD came up), so now the ground mech upgrades are separated from airt mech upgrades which indirectly means that beastyqt's mech style that goes quick into BC's is less viable now than when they played
I don't think its representive to say he went mech into air here. He went mech + BC's + mass SV's. I think I brought up months ago how they were buffed in 3 ways relative to BW:
1) More HP
2) Blink
3) Share mech and air upgrades
When Devourers were nerfed, it would have made sense to nerf BC's simultaneously. Shared mech air and air upgrades were in the game in order to incentivize later game Viking/banshee-play, something we rarely see (perhaps with the exception of TvT, however I believe that is just a temporaryily meta-game thing which only work when you go too light on Goliaths and too heavy on Vultures).
Since BC's are a late-game only thing and Vikings/Banshee's a part of the earlier game, a balance-problem with BC*s only could (and should IMO) have been fixed by just nerfing the BC relative to BW. The only situation where removing shared mech and air upgrades makes sense if one of these three conditions are met:
1) The dev-team believes Banshee/Vikings are boring late game
2) The dev-team believes Banshee/vikings were overpowed late-game and needed a buff
3) The dev-team plans to add later game utlility to Banshee/Viking in a different way later on.
I believe neither of them are the case, and thus the removal of shared mech/air upgrades just feels like a "Starbow has a problem, let's opt for the BW-solution"-situation, instead of thinking of potenital ways to improve it from BW. And in my opinion, viable mid/late game harass options in the Viking and the Banshee could have been an awesome addiiton to mech play from BW (in all 3 matchups).
Regarding turly mech play vs zerg, I think that also comes down to the dev-team not trying to experiment with stronger midgame harass options vs zerg. For instance, what if the gas-constained mech player could get Banshee's out for like 200/50 instead. And what if Banshee's weren't hardcountered late game by Scourge/Mutalisks?
Or what if Vultures could kill Spine crawlers much easier and do better vs Hydralisks? There are tons of ways to improve harass-options of mech play, but when you instead nerf the HP of the Vulture from 80 to 70 while adding creep spread and make it easier to plant spines in mineral lines, it's no surprise that mech needs to be played extremely turtly.
Since mech play already was turtly vs zerg in BW, I would have tried to balance mech around having much stronger offensive options - Instead I get the notion that the ones pulling the strings in the current dev-team wants something as close to BW as possible.
|
Can't you just share one armor upgrade? I don't see why it has to be both or neither.
|
On August 20 2014 06:18 Grumbels wrote:
Can't you just share one armor upgrade? I don't see why it has to be both or neither.
Well, I actually suggested (just before it was implemented in January I believe) to only share the weapon upgrades weapon upgrades while simulstaneously nerfing the BC because the BC obviously didn't need a buff relative to BW. But on the other hand it was clear that when you had like 2/2 mech upgrades, why would you ever opt for Banshee's or Vikings over SV's/goliaths.
With the changes that Kabel instead implemented, it's not that surprising how strong the BC tuned out.
Nevertheless, I think you probably can have both upgrades in the game. At least if we look isolated at the BC it's very easy to nerf its armor by one (before upgrades)/reduce HP and/or reduce damage. It's simply very easy to balance the BC around shared upgrades.
On the other hand, it is possible that Banshee in TvT for instance might be slightly too strong with shared ups. Though as stated above, that might be a temporary meta-game thing.
|
BCs have 100more hp to.
I dont see the need in sharing upgrades at all. If you wanna go air then you go air upgrades.
In tvz, zerg has seperate upgrades and if terran doesnt than its an unfair advantage for terran which is bad design.
Its a good thing these are gone all together.
There are many things to make mech more offensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
