EPTOn June 30 2015 19:29 Ej_ wrote:
did someone say graph thread?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4ipoEM7.png)
did someone say graph thread?
Haha, this looks like one of Geiko's graphs. Very obvious and empty at the same time.
Artosis says SC2 is more strategic than BW - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Phaenoman
568 Posts
Haha, this looks like one of Geiko's graphs. Very obvious and empty at the same time. | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:09 vOdToasT wrote: No. Brood War has a higher mechanical skill floor. That doesn't mean that it has a lower strategic skill ceiling, or floor. congratulations on being the only person arguing in this thread who actually understands the importance of skill floor (as opposed to the always mentioned, never correctly, skill ceiling) | ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:21 lichter wrote: congratulations on being the only person arguing in this thread who actually understands the importance of skill floor (as opposed to the always mentioned, never correctly, skill ceiling) Thanks, man. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On June 30 2015 12:44 Waxangel wrote: http://scdojo.tumblr.com/post/122799820950/thoughts-on-the-gsl-kespa-defeat Oh yeah he said some stuff about the GSL finals and Rain and KeSPA and stuff too. But basically I'm posting this just to fish for a response from Rekrul He's says a whole bunch of stuff. Some of it is just damn straight laughable and the fact of the matter is he hasn't been around BW for quite some time so ofc he's going to say something tongue in cheek when he's been playing and doing all sorts of shit besides BW. SC didn't become a game of speed and mechanics overnight derpa derpa doo. Not by a long shot and the game was studied to death and to this day it still is. When you have a dev who is changing things nonstop with game and still producing another expansion to boot. You're going to get new timings and new shit to play around with. When was the last patch in BW? Ages ago. Does BW really need to be patched? Fuck no. The game is pretty balanced. Can you say the same for SC2? To a certain extent. Now I really wish people wouldn't go overboard over something someone said especially when they used to consider themselves a pro gamer in BW. *cough* Sorry Dan and other Dan (for beating you to the punch). I could go HAM on this all day. | ||
|
REyeM
2674 Posts
| ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
He didn't really mean to say that one game is strategically depper than the other, i think? | ||
|
KrOmander
United Kingdom78 Posts
| ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:34 The_Red_Viper wrote: In the end Artosis meant strategy is more important in sc2 cause you won't be able to get very far purely on mechanics, no? He didn't really mean to say that one game is strategically depper than the other, i think? Yes, but let's not spoil the fun! | ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:34 The_Red_Viper wrote: In the end Artosis meant strategy is more important in sc2 cause you won't be able to get very far purely on mechanics, no? He didn't really mean to say that one game is strategically depper than the other, i think? I don't think he meant that, actually. (But, if SC2 had come first, there would be people complaining that SC1 lacks the deeper strategy that SC2 offers. These strategic choices that people are making have their own beauty…beauty which can be pretty hard to see. End of aside.) (Oh, by the way, here’s a second aside. Part of the reason why SC2 is so strategic is the hard counters. The units we love to hate, the Marauder, the Roach and the Immortal actually themselves add a whole different type of depth that just doesn’t exist in SC1. These units truly punish you for poor moves or decisions, in ways nothing from SC1 ever could. There’s a lot more to the strategic depth than those of course, just a fun little side point I wanted to make.) | ||
|
Espers
United Kingdom606 Posts
| ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:42 KrOmander wrote: Hard to say really. In Sc2 the top guys all have close to perfect macro and and there is little between them in terms of mechanics The same is true for Brood War. It's just that Brood War's mechanical skill floor is higher. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:52 The_Templar wrote: I don't think he meant that, actually. Wax should have quoted these parts instead then, haha :D (or i should have read everything) After reading the whole thing, yeah i don't like it at all. He doesn't really explain his thoughts, he just states things without any real examples. "There is a lot more to the strategic depth of course", yeah well then maybe you should talk about this if you want to be taken seriously? Kinda disappointed by this blog, no real content to argue about tbh. except the conclusion which comes out of nowhere obviously  | ||
|
Superouman
France2195 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:21 lichter wrote: congratulations on being the only person arguing in this thread who actually understands the importance of skill floor (as opposed to the always mentioned, never correctly, skill ceiling) Someone, give this guy TL+ | ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5794 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On June 30 2015 22:10 algue wrote: I'd be interested in knowing how Artosis defines the word "strategy" because he seems to exclude mecanics, speed and army movements from it eventhough good logistics if a key ingredient to win a war and logistics play a way more important role in BW than in Sc2. From the sounds of it he means deeper decisions with how you set up. So I guess what he wants to say with it is that there are more playable build orders, more playable unit compositions, more playable timing attacks. Ergo he concludes: What I’m trying to say here is, it is far more important to be in the top 95% of macro players and know all the different reactionary branches of your build orders, than to be in the top 99.9% of macro players and have a general idea of what to do. Which is the reversed situation in SC1 according to him. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3489 Posts
It's not really a fair comparison either, since BW has been played at a high level for so much longer than SC2, ofc that will mean the well of strategy deepens and you always build on top of that, making it much harder to get into the game as a newcomer. Now SC2 is neither > BW in strategy nor < BW in mechanical skill. But one can consider the one more crucial in the one game and less in the other and vice versa, but more importantly there's plenty of skills inside the broad catagories of mechanics&strategy. We even see in SC2 what a positional genius Flash is and what a genius Jaedong is in his sheer power to find an alternative win condition that no mortal would think of. On the flip side, I'd argue that reaction/reflex is a much more prelavent skill toi have in SC2 and one that challenges the mechanics of BW. While rythm and high amount of tasks done in BW>SC2, SC2>BW in how you need to be ready for ANYTHING on a micro level. SC2 is in general a faster game than BW, so while BW needs constant attention and high APM, in SC2 I'd say it spikes more, some moment you can do almost nothing and just stare at your shit, but at some times, you NEED to spike to high APM, moreso than in BW. As for normal battle micro I'd say no game is more surperior than the other in the amount of stuff you can do, but it would be a crime to say that SC2 micro is as important. I'm kind of all over the place, but I find it cool that there's actually room for players such as Elfi or Space(WC3,) where even though they have such inferior mechanics(non-micro,) they can still prevail with stellar decision making. It would be a shame if a true genius of RTS could find no room in the game, because of inferior mechanics, but ofc, you need to cut the line somewhere, since strategy&mechanics go so hand in hand. SC2 is still a young game and we see strategic depth still evolve on maps such as King Sejong Station that have "been figured out" and that is the sort of strategic depth that could potentially challenge that of BW one day, but in time and with LotV I really think SC2 could become and overall harder game in not only the strategy department, but overall. | ||
|
SixStrings
Germany2046 Posts
On June 30 2015 21:57 Espers wrote: lol professional sc2 caster says his game is better than its predecessor, shocker! Precisely. Of course Shell employees deny that climate change is real, they have an agenda. Now imagine how fervently they'd attack climate change if Shell were on the brink of bankruptcy. There'd be Shell to pay. | ||
|
althaz
Australia1001 Posts
In SC2, making a few poor decisions can absolutely cost you the game. In Broodwar, because of the increased importance of tactics (including but not limited to micro) and (somewhat) decreased importance of strategy poor decisions can more easily be recovered from. IMO the extra strategic intensity of SC2 is what makes it the weaker game of the two. That said, SC2 is still my 2nd favourite game of all time  . | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
Macro in SC2 is relatively easier to at the pro level the games are more about strategy and less about who can click buttons faster. That's not to say strategy and mechanics are not important in either game. So I can agree with Artosis here. | ||
| ||
