| Forum Index > Closed |
|
spajn
34 Posts
They should do the war3 pathfinding and ATLEAST make units take up more space.. There is so little room to micro in this game its sad, pulling injured units is useless already in midgame because ball dps is already too high so the only micro in this game is arranging your army a little bit before a battle.. wooow. and stop saying "another bw thread" maybe people keep making them because sc2 is missing something that could very easily be added into the game and make it way more epic?? | ||
|
Bleak
Turkey3059 Posts
| ||
|
Diizzy
United States828 Posts
| ||
|
blubbdavid
Switzerland2412 Posts
On November 25 2011 11:52 darklight54321 wrote: As soon as these posts arrive by the second page it loses all point. Let me say this bluntly first, before going into actual detail. Harder =/= equal better, nor should the focus be on making things smaller. and another point harder = less popularity. (more about casuals then point 1) Now to go into details point 1. Making it harder doesn't make it more interesting. What makes games interesting is how players use the mechanics given to them. Players in BW make use of the constricted control groups as their form of army control and with a larger army possible it was fairly simple that you'd not get maxed as often. The max isn't a "goal" it's just part of the game. Now take this to SC2. With higher worker count and armies that die faster, you get quicker battles, but you actually get more bang for your buck. Throwaway drops are fairly common even as you get to the highest level. The end game goal is getting the strongest army you can and getting an advantage with that army. It's more passive yes, it's easier yes, but THAT DOESNT MAKE IT WORSE. SC2 allows for a higher focus then who micros that one control group of dragoons better, it allows for an even higher level of overall strategy then we see right now and that we couldn't see in BW. In BW the micro/macro mechanics restrict how good you are, and the legends are those that go beyond that level. In SC2 the average pro must understand more strategy then the average BW pro, simply because the sc2 pros can't depend on micro/macro as much. Thats where the similarity of chess comes in, it's seems you dont like the fact that higher level strategy is used. I'm all for more action packed games, but not at the expense of what i see as the crowning achievement of SC2, the easier mechanics but higher focus on strategy. point 2 BW could never get to the level of SC2 in viewership and as an international esport. A large majority of viewers are players (or would be players if they didn't watch), THIS is the difference that will make sc2 a true success internationally. No longer do you have to be a good RTS player or really understand the game to even begin to see what's going on in the game. Fact, people like to watch what they can understand. People can watch sc2 who couldn't even begin to watch BW (i'm completely disregarding graphics btw, since they could always make BW 2.0 as many of you seem to want). This is more relating to esports as a success vs as a game, but it is still a very important point. Ok, this post so inherently wrong. Like, really wrong. Point 1. Less mechanics does not equal more strategy. The macro of the BW pro's is so memorized, they don't even have to think about it. Even though it is harder than the SC2 macro, after years of grinding you automatically do this. Does a basketball pro need to think about dribbling? No. There is no higher focus on strategy. Or is the space in the brain shared for strategy and mechanics? So if the mechanics neurons are less active, do the strategy neurons have free way to send signal because they are not blocked anymore? Hey, BW pros can think and macro at the same time, yes, maybe be surprising for you who is oh so literate in StarCraft. Point 2 Watch any BW Proleague/Starleague game. See the QTpies. And I spotted a small paradox between 1 and 2: if less action = more strategy, then you need to understand the game before you can enjoy it, hence you need some basic knowledge about SC2, which contradicts Point 2, because according to that point, No longer do you have to be a good RTS player or really understand the game to even begin to see what's going on in the game. Fact, people like to watch what they can understand. But casuals who don't play SC2 don't understand strategy, hence the fallacy. Less action reduces the watchability of a SC2. Like in Chess, where you have like 100% strategy and no tits & 'splosions, a casual won't have a clue about what is going on. In BW, QTs watch it because of the action and the players. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 27 2011 01:39 spajn wrote: Its NOT going in the right direction, even with higher supply and more board control units it will still be very rewarding keeping your army in a ball because of how units clump up so nicely and the huge dps they dish out. They should do the war3 pathfinding and ATLEAST make units take up more space.. There is so little room to micro in this game its sad, pulling injured units is useless already in midgame because ball dps is already too high so the only micro in this game is arranging your army a little bit before a battle.. wooow. and stop saying "another bw thread" maybe people keep making them because sc2 is missing something that could very easily be added into the game and make it way more epic?? then don't play this game if you think "it's sad" Go back to your perfect little broodwar world and play broodwar... NOONE is telling you that you must not play broodwar, just because it has a successor! And maybe these threads keep coming up, because people just like to whine around about nostalgic things. But everytime they start broodwar, they realize that they WANT the comfortness of big control groups. They WANT good pathing. They WANT to move a ball around. They WANT to play Starcraft2 as it is! This is just another "I want to play broodwar, but everyone prefers WoL and that sucks, so please change mak WoL=BW so that they have to play broodwar with me" | ||
|
blubbdavid
Switzerland2412 Posts
On November 27 2011 02:41 Big J wrote: then don't play this game if you think "it's sad" Go back to your perfect little broodwar world and play broodwar... NOONE is telling you that you must not play broodwar, just because it has a successor! And maybe these threads keep coming up, because people just like to whine around about nostalgic things. But everytime they start broodwar, they realize that they WANT the comfortness of big control groups. They WANT good pathing. They WANT to move a ball around. They WANT to play Starcraft2 as it is! This is just another "I want to play broodwar, but everyone prefers WoL and that sucks, so please change mak WoL=BW so that they have to play broodwar with me" The relationship of BWlers to SC2 is similar to the relationship of CJ fans to Savior. They have been disappointed, yet they can't let it go. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
If Protoss makes a death ball, the game will be passive. Until P stop winning with such easy to pull off strategy, then the game will continue to be passive. | ||
|
lu_cid
United States428 Posts
On November 27 2011 02:41 Big J wrote: then don't play this game if you think "it's sad" Go back to your perfect little broodwar world and play broodwar... NOONE is telling you that you must not play broodwar, just because it has a successor! And maybe these threads keep coming up, because people just like to whine around about nostalgic things. But everytime they start broodwar, they realize that they WANT the comfortness of big control groups. They WANT good pathing. They WANT to move a ball around. They WANT to play Starcraft2 as it is! This is just another "I want to play broodwar, but everyone prefers WoL and that sucks, so please change mak WoL=BW so that they have to play broodwar with me" Well it's not much fun when nobody plays any more. The release of SC2 in all its newness all but killed the small foreign bw community... Starcraft is hard and takes a lot of work, and people want to be compensated for their time. So they all everyone switched. Can't really blame them. It's pretty silly to say "just go play brood war". Yeah I do still play it but I'd rather play the game that replaced BW in the RTS community and have it actually be as good as BW. The fact is it should be better, how many years did it take to develop this game while having an already epic predecessor to use as an example? | ||
|
Mr.Pyro
Denmark959 Posts
Well, basically most matchups with Protoss becomes a turtling game if it transitions into something late since you need to have a ball to do damage, there's really no reward for spreading your army across the map. | ||
|
razy
Russian Federation899 Posts
On November 27 2011 01:34 eourcs wrote: PvT will become really boring once people realize that sitting on 3-4 bases with a deathball and accumulating money + gateways is the best way to play. Mana and Hasuobs have been doing this for the last 8-10 months, and they rarely lose PvT. But no, we're still gonna have idiots doing 2base allins and then complaining about balance once it stops working. it won't man, because terrans will have to force the issue and start playing aggressively. No terran wants toss on fast three bases uncontested, believe me... | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On November 25 2011 08:35 ajabberwok wrote: What quantifiable measurement, what number, what threshold must be met before you would admit SC2 is as good or better than BroodWar? Number of audience members at tournaments? Number of tournaments? Number of countries holding tournaments? Number of years tournaments are held? Amount of prize money given out? Number of companies sponsoring pro players? Amount of money earned by pro players? Number of units of the game sold? Or maybe you're more interested in numbers related directly to the game itself so perhaps: Average duration of pro games? Average number of units killed in pro games? Average number of engagements in pro games? We can discuss numbers solidly and logically, but it's hard to discuss individuals' qualitative, gut-level requirements for satisfaction. How can you quantify music? Take Justin Bieber vs your favourite band, let's say Led Zep just because a lot of people like them but you can interchange it with any band/singer you like. Of course assuming you think Justin Bieber is inferior to Led Zep, otherwise feel free to swap anyone with anyone else, especially effective for someone inferior + famous vs superior + not famous. Using the above example I'm sure we all can agree that 1 is inferior than the other. Then try reposing all your questions again. Number of audience members at concerts? Number of concerts? Number of countries holding concerts? Number of years concerts are held? Amount of prize money given out? (N/A) Maybe Amount paid for concerts? Number of companies sponsoring? Amount of money earned? Number of units of the albums sold? Or maybe you're more interested in numbers related directly to the song itself so perhaps: Average duration of songs? Average number of notes or words in songs? Average number of hooks in songs? This is a game, some say an art. The moment you can quantify it the way you seem to want it I think it ceases being one. I don't and don't know how to get philosophical about it but in short I think we can agree it doesn't feel right to do it. So no, I can't prove it using your methods. Think about other ("real and legit") sports. How can you quantify them? Take my earlier slamball vs basketball comparison. Or maybe even this NBA vs WNBA one (let's put gender differences aside). I pasted the first plays of the year highlights I found + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA2WKICrUyI If you watch those 2 plays of the year videos, you'll know something feels wrong, the women are inferior. But how can you quantify that? Their dunks aren't flashy? How can you quantify flashiness? Hang time? Movement of arms? Strength and force used to slam it in? | ||
|
HowardRoark
1146 Posts
On November 27 2011 02:41 Big J wrote: then don't play this game if you think "it's sad" Go back to your perfect little broodwar world and play broodwar... NOONE is telling you that you must not play broodwar, just because it has a successor! And maybe these threads keep coming up, because people just like to whine around about nostalgic things. But everytime they start broodwar, they realize that they WANT the comfortness of big control groups. They WANT good pathing. They WANT to move a ball around. They WANT to play Starcraft2 as it is! This is just another "I want to play broodwar, but everyone prefers WoL and that sucks, so please change mak WoL=BW so that they have to play broodwar with me" Actually, we can't go back to BW, since Blizzard made sure to kill of BW completely. The only argument you come up with is that we can choose to go back, but the scene is dead, and WoL is the cause. Did you miss that even proleague will start with WoL? TSL switched over, Dreamhack aswell, so where do I go if I want to watch well designed RTS? Therefore, people wanted WoL to be well designed, just because there are nothing to to back to. | ||
|
SwizzY
United States1549 Posts
On November 27 2011 02:16 Bleak wrote: What Starcraft 2 needs is more positional play in some matchups (TvP, ZvP, PvP). I think the issue is how poorly Protoss is designed, warpgates fucked up Protoss balancing, as they had to make them weaker, and Toss had to rely on a boring 1-a unit such as Colossus. The biggest problem with Sc2 is Protoss, it needs to be designed better, warpgates need to be removed, and core gateway units need a better design+a unit that you can use to zone out enemy is needed. (or that would pay off with good micro) I think that your suggestions tie in with developing sweet-ass maps that are larger yet don't give zerg an inherent advantage (which they do). Warpgates definitely need to be tweaked still as it makes no sense that they left normal gateways in the game as well.. (should just give gateways lower unit CD). My personal opinion is that the lead designers of SC2 (browder,kim) realize they might have released SC2 maybe a month or two too early to address just how much warpgates dictate the protoss metagame right now. It's impossible to tweak it anymore without drastically changing how the race plays as a whole. TL;DR - They aren't changing a thing until HotS comes out and they have an excuse to fuck with the metagame.  | ||
|
Scribble
2077 Posts
To everyone who fails to see how drastically play has changed over the course of the year, and would prefer to just believe that SC2 simply can't ever be as challenging as BW, I'd like to point something. BW is to WC2 what SC2 is to BW, and yet when I first discovered TL 4-5 years ago I don't remember threads full of bitching about how BW was an inferior streamlined game. Even further back, before I found TL, I don't remember ever once hearing somebody dismiss SC1 just because it's an easier game with a more user friendly interface (unit groups of 12, better worker pathing, buildings can be unit grouped, auto-casting, etc.). People let the game develop. A year and a half in they marveled at how far it had come instead of comparing the capabilities of players to WC2 players (even though, speaking relative to what we see today, the play was still shitty). Do you know why? Because while WC2 is objectively harder than BW which is harder than SC2, no human being will ever reach any of the skill ceilings for these games. Nobody ever hit the WC2 skill ceiling, nobody is going to hit the BW ceiling, and nobody will hit it for SC2 either. Also, if you genuinely believe that the play isn't advancing quickly, maybe consider some other factors like the less-than-blossoming Korean scene and the insane number of mediocre semi-pros. While you're doing that, though, go back and watch some games from GSL Open 1 or the 2010 IEM finals at Gamescom, then January, then skip ahead to TSL 3, then GSL October or Orlando or something else recent. tl;dr Chill. Bookmark this thread and look back on it 1-2 years from now and laugh. Edit: As for the OP itself, I like the discussion about the current level passivity, but the apples/oranges BW vs SC2 stuff is always just going to espouse conflict as opposed to discussion. | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On November 24 2011 03:16 yeint wrote: "And when I say your wife is ugly, I mean it but not in an elitist or dismissive way, but as someone who wants her to look better". Do you not understand that telling us that our game is inferior because it's not more like your game is insulting in and of itself? SC2 has been out for over a year. It has a huge following and a vibrant pro scene. It is not meant to be Brood War HD, it's its own game, and you are not going to convince anyone at all by telling them the game they are passionate about is actually a boring failure. Things will change in HotS, and some of those changes do seem to address some of the concerns people in this thread have, i.e. better space control and more incentives to move food out of main armies. Your wife analogy hold very true if your wife as an object/game (like SC2), where you can manipulate her and her features any way you want. Where God constantly oversees her development and polishes her, and you can complain/suggest to God used to listen and change and improve her. But God doesn't listen to you or the "professional beauty experts", instead he has his own ideas, he seems to like small boobs so he gives every wife small boobs. He has a fetish for feet and likes to bite them so he gives them destructive feet which can grow back after you bite it off. My point was to show you the views of the BW players love the game, what goes on in their mind when they say they find SC2 boring. What they actually want when they complain about SC2 --- to be able to enjoy playing it just like they did with BW. Not because they feel special for having played an old game. There was not a single reason I gave concerning SC2 > BW or BW >SC2 | ||
|
Ysellian
Netherlands9029 Posts
On November 27 2011 03:41 SwizzY wrote: I think that your suggestions tie in with developing sweet-ass maps that are larger yet don't give zerg an inherent advantage (which they do). Warpgates definitely need to be tweaked still as it makes no sense that they left normal gateways in the game as well.. (should just give gateways lower unit CD). My personal opinion is that the lead designers of SC2 (browder,kim) realize they might have released SC2 maybe a month or two too early to address just how much warpgates dictate the protoss metagame right now. It's impossible to tweak it anymore without drastically changing how the race plays as a whole. TL;DR - They aren't changing a thing until HotS comes out and they have an excuse to fuck with the metagame. Tweaking them to make them weaker and perhaps supply efficient would make things very interesting, but the first step to a better game is the removal of the colossus. | ||
|
bmml
United Kingdom962 Posts
| ||
|
Kluey
Canada1197 Posts
| ||
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
On November 23 2011 13:05 SkimGuy wrote: EsuBuildings xd I posted this like 3 months ago on Gamefaqs. Its basically because everyone is lazy and rather max out before doing any type of harassment. The game I used to demonstrate the amount of action that is possible in BW is game 1 of n.Die_soO vs JangBi in the OSL semis: I bet you're unable to find that much action in any SC2 game xd awesome game. archon/reaver/templar is such bullshit | ||
|
babysimba
10466 Posts
The main problem is unit collision. Units clumping just doesn't work well with ranged units. One type of units will always have an advantage over another once they hit a critical mass (e.g. marines), and that's why mirror match-ups do not have this problem besides pvp (colo and lack of defenders' advantage). Blizzard try to solve this deathball syndrome by forcing race to rely on aoe units. So what happens in half the games is the one with a lead just kill/maintain their lead once they hit a certain critical mass before aoe is out. There's little leeway for comebacks, you can't cut your backbone army for fragile aoe units. Now imagine if armies are not clumped up. Units at the back can't attack well. You are forced to split up your army to utilize 100% of your army. Units don't die as fast and you can micro individual units now. Timing attacks will become less effective. Sentries can finally serve as their intended role - changing terrain instead of splitting armies. Aoe units can be changed back to high dps with them not damaging as many units. Static defences can be weakened with stronger units responsible for zonal defence. However, this will not cause turtlish playstyle because one's defence is still limited by his apm. Exciting sc games are defined by tactics, and sc2 lacks that. Most games are predictable once at the mid game. If the one with a lead loses, it's usually because of mistakes (well you can hear that from casters almost every game -_-) . And you know the game is not exciting when one talks about mistakes more than praising players for pulling off brilliant maneuvers. If i could change the game, i would change unit collision, and limit air units to 12 units selection to prevent OP air unit clump. Tweak the raw stats of units and we are good to go even with current WoL unit design. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  33924Sea  8847Hyuk  7671Horang2 2674Flash 1873Bisu 1360Mini 634Soulkey 226Snow 193Leta 186[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games ScreaM2082 B2W.Neo1685 ceh91155 DeMusliM579 XBOCT456 crisheroes453 Pyrionflax320 Hui .290 shoxiejesuss245 Livibee230 ArmadaUGS216 hiko214 Happy207 Mew2King136 Liquid`VortiX108 KnowMe75 Trikslyr58 RotterdaM8 |
|
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
OSC
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
SOOP
NightMare vs Oliveira
SC Evo Complete
WardiTV Invitational
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
