|
Writer: stuchiu
another one
|
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
|
Mute City2363 Posts
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
|
While no one ever perfectly emulated Life's style of SC2, his tactical plays became part of the basic fundamentals of Zerg play that every player would include to some extent in their repertoire.
Surprised there is no mention of DRG. While Life refined zerg aggression, DRG literraly invented counterattacks. Before DRG terrans would never wall of their naturals nor have any bunker while attacking the zerg player.
Zerg before DRG was all about defending and defending, but DRG reinvented how you could play zerg in early 2011, and terran needed to adjust their playstyle as a consequence.
|
On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong.
Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
|
I also don't see anything special about Polt vs MMA. Looking for ways to be aggressive and take favorable trades was always what Marine/Tanks was about. Polt just did it pretty well in that game.
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
I still wager that Marineking didn't think about splitting Marines before he saw MVP do it.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
On May 18 2016 00:39 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +While no one ever perfectly emulated Life's style of SC2, his tactical plays became part of the basic fundamentals of Zerg play that every player would include to some extent in their repertoire. Surprised there is no mention of DRG. While Life refined zerg aggression, DRG literraly invented counterattacks. Before DRG terrans would never wall of there naturals nor have any bunker before attacking the zerg player. Zerg before DRG was all about defending and defending, but DRG reinvented how you could play zerg in early 2011, and terran needed to adjust their playstyle as a consequence.
DRG was a ZvT monster back then
I'm surprised to see no mention of Parting's immortal all-in since it was a lot more important than those PvT openings IMO
|
I would rate Trickster pretty high in Protoss strategy building. Iirc, he was the one who first to utilize force field in early engagement before MC and He brought the mass AOE (HT, Colossus & Archon) deathball in PVT and PVZ.
And DRG, the one who save Zerg from the speed ling opening.
|
On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
|
On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh.
Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
|
Mute City2363 Posts
On May 18 2016 00:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that. LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order).
Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
|
On May 18 2016 01:12 thecrazymunchkin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 00:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that. LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think. I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV. Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014. However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
INnoVation, Solar, Trap, Dream, Rogue, soO, Classic, Byul/sOs.
not sure I agree.
|
While I agree terran play was defined in early years (I would add to MMA to MvP mkp and Polt though), it still had some important changes afterward
For instance there were two "revolutions" in TvP in HotS, changing the meta drastically in the match up :
FIrst one was made by the CJ entus terrans during Hot6ix cup : it was the constant mine drop strategy. When everybody was just doing one mine drop as an opening, sKyHigH and BByong showed that you could keep on dropping forever until the eventual win, even if first drops were defended there would always be one moment when the big mine hit would happen and give you a game wining advantage.
Chronologically, sKyHigh vs Classic on KSS was the first game to show this. (twitch vod is no longer available, though)
Then, the second revolution was made by Maru when he decided he didn't need vikings to deal with the colossi. The infamous game against Myungsik still bring tears in protosses eyes.
With LotV, these two revolutions are now totally obsolete, but they are still worth mentioning imo.
Edit : found sKyHigh vs Classic on youtube : here game starts at 19min 50.
You can see it's a revolution just by hearing how puzzled and clueless the casters are about a build that would be the standard 1 month later. Even MoonGlade doesn't understand shit until it's obvious.
|
On May 18 2016 01:38 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 01:12 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that. LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think. I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV. Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014. However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory. INnoVation, Solar, Trap, Dream, Rogue, soO, Classic, Byul/sOs. not sure I agree.
Many big names with weak performances, wouldn't agree with that list tbh. Granted I assume a bunch of them are still ahead of top foreigners.
|
On May 18 2016 01:38 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 01:12 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that. LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think. I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV. Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014. However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory. INnoVation, Solar, Trap, Dream, Rogue, soO, Classic, Byul/sOs. not sure I agree.
Yeah i don't understand it either tbh.
|
Mute City2363 Posts
On May 18 2016 01:38 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 01:12 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:47 Elentos wrote:On May 18 2016 00:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On May 18 2016 00:34 thecrazymunchkin wrote:On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it.
Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist".
Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though!
I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored.
You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess. It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way? They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS. Or something like that. LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think. I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV. Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014. However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory. INnoVation, Solar, Trap, Dream, Rogue, soO, Classic, Byul/sOs. not sure I agree.
The funny thing is that 7 of those players are playing worse than their peak levels at the moment, while Cure's only really convinced me in TvZ.
Calling INno / sOs / ByuL top 16 KR at the moment is a joke either way
|
I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
|
|
|
I thought it'd be longer. I am disappoint, stuchi :<
Still, good read.
|
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote:
I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
this is very wrong in light of modern PvZ
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
