Until the internet gods decide otherwise, THE SITE IS UP as of 13:10KST (TL TIME), 11:10 EST. FYI, I'm on the lookout for better hosting so this will never happen again. Believe me, if you are frustrated so am I.
More and more interviews are rolling out and I've got a ton more planned over the next couple of weeks.
-Louder: Quiet little monster. The Evil Genius Protoss, the top Protoss in Platinum Div 5, talks about his views on beta: its shortfalls (numerous) and its potential (high). "The more I play it, the more it falls short."
-Chill: The Strategy Czar Shrugs. Chill, TL moderator extraordinaire, talks about the future of SC2 - Koreans, maps, ladders and his own prospects. “I don’t think I’ll miss Brood War" and “I’m not excited" for StarCraft 2."
-PsyonicReaver: Living in the blue glow. As you might imagine, being housemates with gamers like Nyoken, Machine and InkA comes with a lot of StarCraft. Psyonic talks about what life is like in a house full of Brood War players.“Since beta has come out, I’ve only gotten four to five hours of sleep a night.”
Thanks for bearing with me over a shitty day of being down :D
I agree with Louder on all accounts about the Beta. If they keep the micro the way it is right now the game isn't going to be as good as it can be. It's crucial to the success of e-sports that they fix this so that we can go back to being in awe over moves/micro done by top players. There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order. Once you're ahead it's really hard to give away your advantage because even if your units get caught off guard they will still do the right thing in battle. Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it. That element is completely gone now. If you have enough Zerglings you'll just kill your opponent almost regardless of what he does.
At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
On February 25 2010 11:01 Insane wrote: Louder is Terran now?
haha at least you got to see the site for the typo in the few seconds it was up ._.
im trying to fix it. will bump when it's up for you folks to read.
No, it's in your post here
-Louder: Quiet little monster. The Evil Genius Protoss, the top Terran in Platinum Div 5, talks about his views on beta: its shortfalls (numerous) and its potential (high). "The more I play it, the more it falls short."
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
this is an argument i don't understand. Honestly you really think that 99.9% of the non-pro population WOULDN'T buy the game because of this ? SC2 could come out and inside the box is fucking popcorn, and its still going to sell xxxmillion copies. not only that, but its something that most, wouldn't even understand or notice anyways.
On February 25 2010 11:43 Disarray wrote: this is an argument i don't understand. Honestly you really think that 99.9% of the non-pro population WOULDN'T buy the game because of this ? SC2 could come out and inside the box is fucking popcorn, and its still going to sell xxxmillion copies. not only that, but its something that most, wouldn't even understand or notice anyways.
Doesn't matter what we think. Blizzard thinks making the game easier is better for them and I assume it is something they have done a lot of research for, unlike you or me.
On February 25 2010 11:43 Disarray wrote: this is an argument i don't understand. Honestly you really think that 99.9% of the non-pro population WOULDN'T buy the game because of this ? SC2 could come out and inside the box is fucking popcorn, and its still going to sell xxxmillion copies. not only that, but its something that most, wouldn't even understand or notice anyways.
Doesn't matter what we think. Blizzard thinks making the game easier is better for them and I assume it is something they have done a lot of research for, unlike you or me.
Blizzard has made it very clear that they want to support e-sports and take it very seriously. I mean they even went so far as to add in macro mechanics just so there could be something for the hardcore. I really don't see how you can think that Blizzard isn't concerned with how the hardcore fans think.
On February 25 2010 11:43 Disarray wrote: this is an argument i don't understand. Honestly you really think that 99.9% of the non-pro population WOULDN'T buy the game because of this ? SC2 could come out and inside the box is fucking popcorn, and its still going to sell xxxmillion copies. not only that, but its something that most, wouldn't even understand or notice anyways.
Doesn't matter what we think. Blizzard thinks making the game easier is better for them and I assume it is something they have done a lot of research for, unlike you or me.
Blizzard has made it very clear that they want to support e-sports and take it very seriously. I mean they even went so far as to add in macro mechanics just so there could be something for the hardcore. I really don't see how you can think that Blizzard isn't concerned with how the hardcore fans think.
The macro mechanics were only thrown in because they were too concerned about the casual audience and magazine reviews that would butcher them if they didn't include MBS and automine.
Part of me feels bad for Blizzard because they are so concerned about casual players that they refuse to stick their necks out and try to make a "hardcore" product. People are going to buy SC2 no matter what.. it shouldn't have to be dumbed down
the game has been updated to fit into what should be standard for RTS games. some of the finer micro mechanics are gone, but i dont think it will be a huge deal with how competitive it gets.
The BETA has been out for a week, and we are talking about how the game "will be an e-sports failure" and is dumbed down for noobs?
How long did it take us to discover all the intricacies of Starcraft 1? Have some faith. Its a new game with new rules, and its going to take more than week to master everything.
I think it's pretty silly to talk about how "the game is already in trouble" when its in the first waves of a beta and still months away from release (and probably years from a true, final balance)
On February 25 2010 13:07 BlackYoshi wrote: I think it's pretty silly to talk about how "the game is already in trouble" when its in the first waves of a beta and still months away from release (and probably years from a true, final balance)
There is a big difference between good/strategic gameplay mechanics and good balance.
Guys don't forget that the people at Blizzard have feelings too. How would you feel if you tried so hard to please the fans and it's just never good enough. Kind of demotivating if you ask me.
I'm not saying we shouldn't voice our concerns. But I feel we should not claim to see years down the road about how the game will be a failure. Give it a chance, cut Blizzard some slack, lets keep it positive and constructive. It's a fine line. Let's find our balance.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order..
I don't get arguments like this. Sure they auto-surround now, that's fine. Do units auto retreat when they're about to die? Do dropships automatically pick up units that are about to be hit then redrop them? Etc. There's still so much micro possible it's not just 1a2a3a.
(I'm not in the beta, just commenting on what I've seen. Warcraft 3 had autosurround too but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that isn't just BO vs BO since micro plays a huge role in that game)
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order..
I don't get arguments like this. Sure they auto-surround now, that's fine. Do units auto retreat when they're about to die? Do dropships automatically pick up units that are about to be hit then redrop them? Etc. There's still so much micro possible it's not just 1a2a3a.
(I'm not in the beta, just commenting on what I've seen. Warcraft 3 had autosurround too but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that isn't just BO vs BO since micro plays a huge role in that game)
So you've never played the game, yet are arguing about game play with people who have played the game...
So how long is the site going to be broken before you just post test of the interviews in this thread? I understand you want hits for the site, but pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez!
On February 25 2010 13:33 mishimaBeef wrote: I have to agree with BlackYoshi.
Guys don't forget that the people at Blizzard have feelings too. How would you feel if you tried so hard to please the fans and it's just never good enough. Kind of demotivating if you ask me.
I'm not saying we shouldn't voice our concerns. But I feel we should not claim to see years down the road about how the game will be a failure. Give it a chance, cut Blizzard some slack, lets keep it positive and constructive. It's a fine line. Let's find our balance.
/clap
Well said, we should offer our input, but dont be negative, we are helping create the best game of all times!
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I agree with Louder on all accounts about the Beta. If they keep the micro the way it is right now the game isn't going to be as good as it can be. It's crucial to the success of e-sports that they fix this so that we can go back to being in awe over moves/micro done by top players. There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order. Once you're ahead it's really hard to give away your advantage because even if your units get caught off guard they will still do the right thing in battle. Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it. That element is completely gone now. If you have enough Zerglings you'll just kill your opponent almost regardless of what he does.
At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
Yeah and still you have big gaming sites like GiantBomb saying, in their most recent podcast, that Blizzard is basically giving a big 'fuck you' too all other RTS game makers that are trying to be innovative by allegedly making a carbon copy of StarCraft 1.
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcast/ Starts at about 18:45 and they talk about it quite a bit. Really good to listen to if you want to know a bit about what the non-TL community thinks of SC2.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I agree with Louder on all accounts about the Beta. If they keep the micro the way it is right now the game isn't going to be as good as it can be. It's crucial to the success of e-sports that they fix this so that we can go back to being in awe over moves/micro done by top players. There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order. Once you're ahead it's really hard to give away your advantage because even if your units get caught off guard they will still do the right thing in battle. Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it. That element is completely gone now. If you have enough Zerglings you'll just kill your opponent almost regardless of what he does.
At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
Yeah and still you have big gaming sites like GiantBomb saying, in their most recent podcast, that Blizzard is basically giving a big 'fuck you' too all other RTS game makers that are trying to be innovative by allegedly making a carbon copy of StarCraft 1.
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcast/ Starts at about 18:45 and they talk about it quite a bit. Really good to listen to if you want to know a bit about what the non-TL community thinks of SC2.
western game critics are going to hate starcraft 2 because they've been playing CnC, Halo Wars, and other shit that is considered "amazing" because of all the special effects and flashy features.
On February 25 2010 13:33 mishimaBeef wrote: I have to agree with BlackYoshi.
Guys don't forget that the people at Blizzard have feelings too. How would you feel if you tried so hard to please the fans and it's just never good enough. Kind of demotivating if you ask me.
I'm not saying we shouldn't voice our concerns. But I feel we should not claim to see years down the road about how the game will be a failure. Give it a chance, cut Blizzard some slack, lets keep it positive and constructive. It's a fine line. Let's find our balance.
Lets face it:
no matter how good the game is, people will complain about some aspect that is different from the previous game. It happens to literally every single anticipated sequel, from Halo to Modern Warfare to CounterStrike Source.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I agree with Louder on all accounts about the Beta. If they keep the micro the way it is right now the game isn't going to be as good as it can be. It's crucial to the success of e-sports that they fix this so that we can go back to being in awe over moves/micro done by top players. There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order. Once you're ahead it's really hard to give away your advantage because even if your units get caught off guard they will still do the right thing in battle. Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it. That element is completely gone now. If you have enough Zerglings you'll just kill your opponent almost regardless of what he does.
At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
Yeah and still you have big gaming sites like GiantBomb saying, in their most recent podcast, that Blizzard is basically giving a big 'fuck you' too all other RTS game makers that are trying to be innovative by allegedly making a carbon copy of StarCraft 1.
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcast/ Starts at about 18:45 and they talk about it quite a bit. Really good to listen to if you want to know a bit about what the non-TL community thinks of SC2.
western game critics are going to hate starcraft 2 because they've been playing CnC, Halo Wars, and other shit that is considered "amazing" because of all the special effects and flashy features.
What are you talking about? The last Red Alert was panned, and the C&C4 beta is getting trashed in the press. Halo Wars was actually quite good for a console RTS.
IGN lists Starcraft in their top games of all time literally every year.
You have to realize that TL and "competitive" Starcraft is a very small niche of people who actually bought the game, and will buy SC2. I'm confident that Blizzard will make a game that will work for both casual and competitive markets.
Or you can stick to the old game like the CounterStrike people.
I watched that Bombcast thing..I'm sure that they have good intentions, but they don't really know what they're talking about. They ARE super casual rts players who mainly look for story and "cool new shit" in the games the play. I understand that "cool new shit" = $ for most gaming companies, but blizzard has always made cool new SUSTAINABLE shit.
While super "innovative" stuff has short term interest I find it really difficult to create innovative yet sustainable fun, an example is the last few CnC's..
I remember I played Generals a bit and was like "cool snipers who can hide in buildings!" "Cool ridiculous planes!" "Cool superweapons like the finger of doom laser you from my base thing!" "Wow this race has cloaked buildings!"
Would I play that again and again for years? Hell no.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I agree with Louder on all accounts about the Beta. If they keep the micro the way it is right now the game isn't going to be as good as it can be. It's crucial to the success of e-sports that they fix this so that we can go back to being in awe over moves/micro done by top players. There is so little difference possible between two players when they're attacking each other that the games just play out as build order vs build order. Once you're ahead it's really hard to give away your advantage because even if your units get caught off guard they will still do the right thing in battle. Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it. That element is completely gone now. If you have enough Zerglings you'll just kill your opponent almost regardless of what he does.
At the same time I have some doubts Blizzard will do anything about it because they have very consciously made the choice that they wanted noobs to be competent at it so that 99.9% of the non-pro population buys the game.
I agree with this completely. I feel as if my units have no agility and the control I have over them is very limited. I had a conversation with a blizzard employee about this thoughts and was quite saddened when he was completely unaware of the problem and thought it was "fine". This tells me that there is currently a lack of awareness of what micro is in general over at the blizzard house and that instead of us making general complaints about micro we need to identify specific problems that prevent micro and come up with specific solutions / suggestions.
So you guys want SC2 units to be dumber. All the enhanced unit pathfinding and AI is there so Units will choose the best bath to a point or the best way to get maximum coverage. So do you want a zealot to stutter around aimlessly instead trying to get to his target or let it navigate the best path towards its target? Like another poster said, there is no auto retreat or auto dropship pick up, this is just logical things smart AI pathfinding does. BTW there's no such thing as auto surround, just a logical result of smarter AI. There are still tons of ways for players to get good.
On February 25 2010 19:45 flabortaster wrote: So you guys want SC2 units to be dumber. All the enhanced unit pathfinding and AI is there so Units will choose the best bath to a point or the best way to get maximum coverage. So do you want a zealot to stutter around aimlessly instead trying to get to his target or let it navigate the best path towards its target? Like another poster said, there is no auto retreat or auto dropship pick up, this is just logical things smart AI pathfinding does. BTW there's no such thing as auto surround, just a logical result of smarter AI. There are still tons of ways for players to get good.
WELL SAID. Couldn't have said it better myself.
I cannot believe some ppl are actually complaining about smart path finding and AI.
If you want dumb AI just so that you can "micro", go play original Red Alert.
That's what you want right? Dumbest AI possible so you can click-fest?
On February 25 2010 19:45 flabortaster wrote: So you guys want SC2 units to be dumber. All the enhanced unit pathfinding and AI is there so Units will choose the best bath to a point or the best way to get maximum coverage. So do you want a zealot to stutter around aimlessly instead trying to get to his target or let it navigate the best path towards its target? Like another poster said, there is no auto retreat or auto dropship pick up, this is just logical things smart AI pathfinding does. BTW there's no such thing as auto surround, just a logical result of smarter AI. There are still tons of ways for players to get good.
There will still be ways to micro you're right about that, but if you limit a battle micro to retreating your wounded units then in the shortest time you will find that all top players are able to do this perfectly because it's a rather simple task if you don't have to focus on anything else. There needs to be differential between players; watching Flash play Terran and move his units around and comparing it to the next best Terran in the world after the game has been out for 11 years is just amazing. It's amazing because after all this time there still is a difference between these guys. This differences allows us to admire those who do brilliant things with their units. This is a really serious issue that every top player I have talked to has spoken his concerns about.
The argument that BW micro differential appeared after it's release and that SC2 should be given time so that the same can happen is a false argument based on nothing but hope. It's not like they just changes the micro variables and they still need to be figured out again in order to be used properly; they removed the micro variables.
In a way it's like units dumber -> players smarter, units smarter -> players dumber. Which one of these will be more suitable for watching people on TV bringing them to the status of Boxer/Nada/Jaedong/Flash.
I think this forum should get a script that automatically bans users using words like 'click-fest'. If you don't like eSports, then why are you on this site? Isn't there another SC2 site where you can talk about 30min-no-rush carrier vs bc battles?
On February 25 2010 19:45 flabortaster wrote: So you guys want SC2 units to be dumber. All the enhanced unit pathfinding and AI is there so Units will choose the best bath to a point or the best way to get maximum coverage. So do you want a zealot to stutter around aimlessly instead trying to get to his target or let it navigate the best path towards its target? Like another poster said, there is no auto retreat or auto dropship pick up, this is just logical things smart AI pathfinding does. BTW there's no such thing as auto surround, just a logical result of smarter AI. There are still tons of ways for players to get good.
WELL SAID. Couldn't have said it better myself.
I cannot believe some ppl are actually complaining about smart path finding and AI.
If you want dumb AI just so that you can "micro", go play original Red Alert.
That's what you want right? Dumbest AI possible so you can click-fest?
Pathetic complaint.
lol says the guy who will probably play SC2 for 2-3 months and then stop playing Fastest Map and move on to the next flashy game.
There's actually people who want to play SC2 for years and see a deep game evolve out of it.
On February 25 2010 20:19 Asta wrote: I think this forum should get a script that automatically bans users using words like 'click-fest'. If you don't like eSports, then why are you on this site? Isn't there another SC2 site where you can talk about 30min-no-rush carrier vs bc battles?
QFT. These guys aren't even going to play competitively and will get raped regardless of autosurround help and MBS. And then stop playing the game after a couple of months.
On February 25 2010 20:19 Asta wrote: I think this forum should get a script that automatically bans users using words like 'click-fest'. If you don't like eSports, then why are you on this site? Isn't there another SC2 site where you can talk about 30min-no-rush carrier vs bc battles?
I love eSports, which is why I am on this site.
Rest of your arguments are laughable. I will not bother with comment.
So, it's either smart, logical AI or not. The latter may take more "skill", but it's not logical to have unit who doesn't know the simplest way to a point or target. I'll take smarter AI over babysitting crappy AI/pathfinding any day. It should be the player micro that make units excel not keep them from doing something monumentally stupid.(Dragoons going up ramps come to mind) SC1 default AI was terrible, needing the player to manually use them just to make them competent in battle. Unit AI should be by default competent while Player micro should makes them excel even more.
Like it was said, the game is not fully automated. You still have to make the tough decisions, but units shouldn't fail just because they can't handle themselves without your every attention.
On February 25 2010 19:45 flabortaster wrote: So you guys want SC2 units to be dumber. All the enhanced unit pathfinding and AI is there so Units will choose the best bath to a point or the best way to get maximum coverage. So do you want a zealot to stutter around aimlessly instead trying to get to his target or let it navigate the best path towards its target? Like another poster said, there is no auto retreat or auto dropship pick up, this is just logical things smart AI pathfinding does. BTW there's no such thing as auto surround, just a logical result of smarter AI. There are still tons of ways for players to get good.
WELL SAID. Couldn't have said it better myself.
I cannot believe some ppl are actually complaining about smart path finding and AI.
If you want dumb AI just so that you can "micro", go play original Red Alert.
That's what you want right? Dumbest AI possible so you can click-fest?
Pathetic complaint.
lol says the guy who will probably play SC2 for 2-3 months and then stop playing Fastest Map and move on to the next flashy game.
There's actually people who want to play SC2 for years and see a deep game evolve out of it.
On February 25 2010 20:19 Asta wrote: I think this forum should get a script that automatically bans users using words like 'click-fest'. If you don't like eSports, then why are you on this site? Isn't there another SC2 site where you can talk about 30min-no-rush carrier vs bc battles?
QFT. These guys aren't even going to play competitively and will get raped regardless of autosurround help and MBS. And then stop playing the game after a couple of months.
Really, you guys would love the original Red Alerts.
Almost everything has to be manual, requires extreme micro and APM.
I used the acroynm APM since 'click-fest' hurt your feelings.
On February 25 2010 20:24 flabortaster wrote: So, it's either smart, logical AI or not. The latter may take more "skill", but it not logical to have unit who don't know the simplest to a point or target. I'll take smarter AI over babysitting AI/pathfinding any day. It should be the player micro that make units excel not keep them from doing something monumentally stupid.(Dragoons going up ramps come to mind) SC1 default AI was terrible, needing the player to manually use them just to make them competent in battle. Unit AI should be by default competent while Player micro should makes them excel even more.
Like it was said, the game is not fully automated. You still have to make the tough decisions, but units should fail just because they cant handle themselves without you every attention.
No one is asking for Dragoon AI back. Unit path finding that when you click on a spot on the map it will actually go there is also a nice improvement. I don't think anyones concerns are about those things. I'd rather see them gone as well. Keeping them doesn't improve the game from a viewer perspective.
On February 25 2010 20:24 flabortaster wrote: So, it's either smart, logical AI or not. The latter may take more "skill", but it not logical to have unit who don't know the simplest to a point or target. I'll take smarter AI over babysitting AI/pathfinding any day. It should be the player micro that make units excel not keep them from doing something monumentally stupid.(Dragoons going up ramps come to mind) SC1 default AI was terrible, needing the player to manually use them just to make them competent in battle. Unit AI should be by default competent while Player micro should makes them excel even more.
Like it was said, the game is not fully automated. You still have to make the tough decisions, but units should fail just because they cant handle themselves without you every attention.
I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
On February 25 2010 20:33 Eury wrote: I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
There won't be a sc2 pro scene if the game doesn't take skill. There's nothing separating 2 players if both player's zerglings auto surround. The terrible thing about the new AI is that if you try to micro you'll be worse off than if you just watched the new incredible AI in action.
On February 25 2010 20:24 flabortaster wrote: SC1 default AI was terrible, needing the player to manually use them just to make them competent in battle.
I think it would be alright if micro on individual unit level was less important (because such micro is indeed struggling with dumb AI more often than not), but this was compensated with importance of micro on a larger scale: map control, air superiority, harassment, positioning, flanking, dropship play, etc. I find the apparent lack of latter much more worrying, though I believe this is not unfixable. There need to be more very powerful, but otherwise clumsy and fragile units, like the siege tank, the reaver and the lurker, to make positioning important. AoE damage (not spell-based, but unit-based) also needs to be more pronounced, which would make battle micro important.
On February 25 2010 20:07 bendez wrote: If you want dumb AI just so that you can "micro", go play original Red Alert.
That's what you want right? Dumbest AI possible so you can click-fest?
Pathetic complaint.
The AI in Red Alert wasn't "dumb". Play the game before you make comments like this.
I have, extensively. Compared to starcraft, it was "dumb".
Lol? Loading units into transporters(marine/apc), that was buggy from time to time, but that's about it. The units in Starcraft are even "dumber" and the game was released two years later.
I really hate how in sc2, micro is almost non existant. Combined with the easy macro, you have a really dumb simple game right now that almost anyone can be good at. >.<
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
No, there has been plenty of progress. Destructable terrains, controllable strategic points, smoke/grass cover, etc. You may not like it, but many of us do, and it sure was a progress to the genre.
I really can't see the connection between smart unit pathing and e-sports from developing, so I can't comment there.
I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
I find it hilarious how people say that micro is none existent in SC2 while it is the fact that micro is much more important compared to macro in the sequel that is allowing WC3 players to take a number of top spots. In BW micro on 3 zealots won't save you from 18 speedlings either. Its just that BW has been figured out to a very high degree so most of the time armys will be fairly even matched when they do clash, because both players know what works and how to be able to do this. While in most SC2 games at the moment one player lucks out and gets a BO win or one player is just vastly better than another. Yes a few micro elements have gone missing but we did get a couple new ones aswell.
On February 25 2010 20:33 Eury wrote: I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Please name 1 rts game that hasn't been a complete failure in the last decade. Tick tock tick tock tick tock. Times up moron, there have been none! so what is this progress you're talking about? Is it you being able to build 10 battlecruisers simultaneously in sc2 and comps stomp the ai?
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
No, there has been plenty of progress. Destructable terrains, controllable strategic points, smoke/grass cover, etc. You may not like it, but many of us do, and it sure was a progress to the genre.
I really can't see the connection between smart unit pathing and e-sports from developing, so I can't comment there.
Good point except for the part where no one is complaining about anything that you mentioned, good work on being totally stupid.
Broken link still, looking forward to interviews when it gets fixed though. I'm hoping guys like Chill will actually analyze the game's shortcomings rather than OMFG BLIZZARD HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD OMFG SO SEXY I LOVE SC2!!!!!!1111
Is the micro part "almost non-existing" just because the units surround the enemy automatically and have very good pathing, and that this means if you touch you units they actually kill less?
I mean, are there not any situations where it is better to control the units in another way than just the surround? Also how about flanking and army position; i.e. the pathing cannot possible do this, or is there just no need to flank etc?
A last note; a very specific example: In lings vs lings battles many players "overmicro" their lings and lose ling battles they would have won if they had just not "microed" their lings. They lose the battle because of a lack of knowlegde (but if they have the right knowlegde they would have won the battle more convincinly). Can't this be applied to SC2 to? That people simply have not figured out how to micro yet?
On February 25 2010 21:14 Nafaltar wrote: I find it hilarious how people say that micro is none existent in SC2 while it is the fact that micro is much more important compared to macro in the sequel that is allowing WC3 players to take a number of top spots. In BW micro on 3 zealots won't save you from 18 speedlings either. Its just that BW has been figured out to a very high degree so most of the time armys will be fairly even matched when they do clash, because both players know what works and how to be able to do this. While in most SC2 games at the moment one player lucks out and gets a BO win or one player is just vastly better than another. Yes a few micro elements have gone missing but we did get a couple new ones aswell.
wc3 players are taking top spots for the following reasons: 1. not everyone has a beta key and I'm guessing you included because you don't know anything 2. the game is easier and wc3 players are competent enough to be good at it
Micro isn't more important than macro or any stupid simplification like that. Macro and macro were reduced and everything got easier. You had to do everything at once in brood war while thinking about strategy at the same time, that's what made it so unique. It's not a click fest you morons
On February 25 2010 21:25 Ota Solgryn wrote: Some questions for those that play the game.
Is the micro part "almost non-existing" just because the units surround the enemy automatically and have very good pathing, and that this means if you touch you units they actually kill less?
I mean, are there not any situations where it is better to control the units in another way than just the surround? Also how about flanking and army position; i.e. the pathing cannot possible do this, or is there just no need to flank etc?
A last note; a very specific example: In lings vs lings battles many players "overmicro" their lings and lose ling battles they would have won if they had just not "microed" their lings. They lose the battle because of a lack of knowlegde (but if they have the right knowlegde they would have won the battle more convincinly). Can't this be applied to SC2 to? That people simply have not figured out how to micro yet?
So what do the SC2 players say ?
The amount of micro and macro options were reduced and because the AI is so smart you can just leave your units untouched and they will do a decent job against someone trying to micro. Things die so rapidly that piling everything together and attack moving is the majority of what you do. You still CAN micro and macro but it's very very little compared to brood war.
Infact the AI is so smart that it battles your orders sometimes, rofl.
On February 25 2010 21:14 Nafaltar wrote: I find it hilarious how people say that micro is none existent in SC2 while it is the fact that micro is much more important compared to macro in the sequel that is allowing WC3 players to take a number of top spots. In BW micro on 3 zealots won't save you from 18 speedlings either. Its just that BW has been figured out to a very high degree so most of the time armys will be fairly even matched when they do clash, because both players know what works and how to be able to do this. While in most SC2 games at the moment one player lucks out and gets a BO win or one player is just vastly better than another. Yes a few micro elements have gone missing but we did get a couple new ones aswell.
wc3 players are taking top spots for the following reasons: 1. not everyone has a beta key and I'm guessing you included because you don't know anything 2. the game is easier and wc3 players are competent enough to be good at it
Micro isn't more important than macro or any stupid simplification like that. Macro and macro were reduced and everything got easier. You had to do everything at once in brood war while thinking about strategy at the same time, that's what made it so unique. It's not a click fest you morons
learn to play
Hi Audiohelper123,
It's hard to take your opinion seriously with all those childish insults. That is all .
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
On February 25 2010 21:14 Nafaltar wrote: I find it hilarious how people say that micro is none existent in SC2 while it is the fact that micro is much more important compared to macro in the sequel that is allowing WC3 players to take a number of top spots. In BW micro on 3 zealots won't save you from 18 speedlings either. Its just that BW has been figured out to a very high degree so most of the time armys will be fairly even matched when they do clash, because both players know what works and how to be able to do this. While in most SC2 games at the moment one player lucks out and gets a BO win or one player is just vastly better than another. Yes a few micro elements have gone missing but we did get a couple new ones aswell.
wc3 players are taking top spots for the following reasons: 1. not everyone has a beta key and I'm guessing you included because you don't know anything 2. the game is easier and wc3 players are competent enough to be good at it
Micro isn't more important than macro or any stupid simplification like that. Macro and macro were reduced and everything got easier. You had to do everything at once in brood war while thinking about strategy at the same time, that's what made it so unique. It's not a click fest you morons
learn to play
Hi Audiohelper123,
It's hard to take your opinion seriously with all those childish insults. That is all .
Hi bendez
it's hard to take you seriously when you're stupid and don't know anything. That is all
Seems to me like theres actually going to be a fair bit of large army control in the game anyway, as the units naturally seem to 'clump' together much more, it will be quite a hard task to be splitting up big armies late game and get flanks going correctly to avoid getting stomped on by AoE...
jesus christ look at all these freakin noobs trying to argue with people who actually know wtf they are talking about lol
all the top players and legends should just get together and make a big petition or w/e and keep harassing blizzard to fix these problems during the beta =P
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
How does this logic don't imply that FPS should have build in aiming bots? Aiming correctly is what player wants his controlled character to do (some tactical shooters have this option). It is always a matter of balance what skills you want the game to test.
SC also balance it, medics auto heal becouse controlling m&m is already hard.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
Exactly, a game is like a puzzle, and to entertain and challenge you cannot have the puzzle solve itself, with minimal contribution from the...puzzled
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
Im curious to see what the TL staff, ret etc knows about the AI issue... beacuse im sure you talked to devs about it over at the past Blizzcons etc? What was their take on it???
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
and what aspect is this going to be? everything is reduced. Is there some aspect youre hiding from us?
On February 25 2010 21:51 Senx wrote: Im curious to see what the TL staff, ret etc knows about the AI issue... beacuse im sure you talked to devs about it over at the past Blizzcons etc? What was their take on it???
the devs weren't even able to notice that units turn around to attack whats chasing them, they are oblivious to everything.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Actual destructible terrain, being able to zoom out as far as you want, units that can move and shoot, units that act realistic, units that take cover, units that can take care of themself, less base building etc are things many consider are things that have progressed the genre in the last decade or so.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
Some posters here are arguing that Blizzard should just ignore everyone but the hardcore crowd, but what they are missing is that even with a game like Starcraft that got such a large competitive gaming scene, the hardcore crowd is still a small minority of their customers. The first Starcraft sold 11 million copies, half of those never connected to Battle.net at all, and those that did very few got into competitive gaming.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
go rent terminator 3. You dont even need to use your hands for this one! no need to build a base or think about a single thing
the esports scene in korea is what makes blizzard the rts kings. The ppl who want to see things blow up are going to buy the game regardless of how hard it is. However if you make the game super simple you lose the core that keeps the game alive for years to come.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
go rent terminator 3. You dont even need to use your hands for this one! no need to build a base or think about a single thing
Please leave this thread alone. You are pretty much ruining all constructive discussion, as small as it may be.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
go rent terminator 3. You dont even need to use your hands for this one! no need to build a base or think about a single thing
Please leave this thread alone. You are pretty much ruining all constructive discussion, as small as it may be.
isn't this ironic. I felt the same way when reading the garbage you guys posted except I wanted to flip over my desk and every other object in sight.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
go rent terminator 3. You dont even need to use your hands for this one! no need to build a base or think about a single thing
Please leave this thread alone. You are pretty much ruining all constructive discussion, as small as it may be.
isn't this ironic. I felt the same way when reading the garbage you guys posted except I wanted to flip over my desk and every other object in sight.
Think you need to calm down here, just realize Blizzard won't cater to such a minority that we are. Just get over it :C
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
We're not saying it is not important. However, units shouldn't be stupid by default. Most of the micro skill put into this is mostly because pros have no other choice; either micro your units or have them die because they can't even take care of themselves properly. Micro should enhance the units not a method of keeping crappy AI in line.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
We're not saying it is not important. However, units shouldn't be stupid by default. Most of the micro skill put into this is mostly because pros have no other choice; either micro your units or have them die because they can't even take care of themselves properly. Micro should enhance the units not a method of keeping crappy AI in line.
Units in sc aren't exactly dumb. Units in sc2 are just overly smart and do things on their own. The only real example of dumb AI in sc is the dragoon, the rest all work almost perfectly. Everything goes where you tell it to.
On February 25 2010 21:18 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
Yeah exactly. To me the very easy and simple answer to the micro problem is keep it simple.
Example: Whenever you make a unit go somewhere goes to the place in a straight line if possible. If there are obstacles it goes around the obstacles in the shortest distance possible. If there are units clumping in a tight choke the units queue up behind each other without going backwards (like they do i BW which is bad).
This way the units do not behave retardidly, but still just do the most simple move possible, not surround automatically etc. and leaves perfect control to the player, thereby making him responsible for both good/pimp moves and bad/fail moves.
Similar rules could easily be applied to attacking (attack command = attack closest available enemy, if not in range walk in straight line to the closest enemy attacking).
But I guess they just want to make the casual gamer happy, who wants to watch big armies clashing in a realistic and good way with intense clicking. Bleh.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
Starcraft wasn't created to cater to the pro scene. It was a happy accident.
Again, you need to realize you are a very small niche of the market and that what makes the game enjoyable to you isn't the most important
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
We're not saying it is not important. However, units shouldn't be stupid by default. Most of the micro skill put into this is mostly because pros have no other choice; either micro your units or have them die because they can't even take care of themselves properly. Micro should enhance the units not a method of keeping crappy AI in line.
Units in sc aren't exactly dumb. Units in sc2 are just overly smart and do things on their own. The only real example of dumb AI in sc is the dragoon, the rest all work almost perfectly. Everything goes where you tell it to.
melee unti ai is very dumb in sc1. Instead of looking for a vacant spot to attack their target, they wait until the one blocking its way moves.
i think Blizzard needs to add(or buff some that sucks right now) more AoE spells to spice up fights. PvT is fine with EMP vs storm but TvZ for example is a simple attack move and see what happens matchup. get rid of roach bring back lurker+dark swarm
btw suggesting things make you look cool but QQing in the first week of the beta makes you look stupid
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
go rent terminator 3. You dont even need to use your hands for this one! no need to build a base or think about a single thing
Please leave this thread alone. You are pretty much ruining all constructive discussion, as small as it may be.
isn't this ironic. I felt the same way when reading the garbage you guys posted except I wanted to flip over my desk and every other object in sight.
Think you need to calm down here, just realize Blizzard won't cater to such a minority that we are. Just get over it :C
They do listen to the hardcore crowd but they can't just release pretty much Brood War with better graphics even though a lot of people on this site would prefer that. Dumbing down the AI, breaking the UI, and screwing up path finding just isn't an option. What Blizzard can do however is to further tweaking the macro mechanics and adding more possibilities to micro units.
I'm fairly happy with Protoss when it comes to macro, warp gates are nice and chrono boost is an excellent mechanic that opens up for more different builds and timing pushes. Terran and Zerg's mechanics on the other hand feels more underwhelming. Terran all around, and Zerg's queen, while powerful. feels more like a chore, and isn't that interesting to use.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
We're not saying it is not important. However, units shouldn't be stupid by default. Most of the micro skill put into this is mostly because pros have no other choice; either micro your units or have them die because they can't even take care of themselves properly. Micro should enhance the units not a method of keeping crappy AI in line.
Units in sc aren't exactly dumb. Units in sc2 are just overly smart and do things on their own. The only real example of dumb AI in sc is the dragoon, the rest all work almost perfectly. Everything goes where you tell it to.
melee unti ai is very dumb in sc1. Instead of looking for a vacant spot to attack their target, they wait until the one blocking its way moves.
because you told them to attack in a line and not surround and then attack from all angles hence the autosurround in sc2. You tell units to attack in a line but they attack and surround whats in front of them
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
We're not saying it is not important. However, units shouldn't be stupid by default. Most of the micro skill put into this is mostly because pros have no other choice; either micro your units or have them die because they can't even take care of themselves properly. Micro should enhance the units not a method of keeping crappy AI in line.
either micro your units or lose the game because you are worse than your opponent in this department. that's what the whole micro-aspect is about. if micro is simplified to the extent we see in beta currently this whole aspect as a game deciding factor, as a certain "skill" that makes players shine is killed. and if it stays that way i guess i'll always view bw as the superior game in terms of comprehensive control over your own victories.
On February 25 2010 20:33 Eury wrote: I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Please name 1 rts game that hasn't been a complete failure in the last decade. Tick tock tick tock tick tock. Times up moron, there have been none! so what is this progress you're talking about? Is it you being able to build 10 battlecruisers simultaneously in sc2 and comps stomp the ai?
Warcraft III, Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire, the Warhammer 40K games, Supreme Commmander all sold well and were well liked.
I mean, only WC3 had a proscene really, but that really isn't a games success; its a very small part of it.
Do you guys even want a sequel? Or did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
But it is not gone. You are speaking as if there is auto-surround button that you can click and forget. You still need to micro your lings to kill that early scout, anticipate its route and then close in. In SC2, units move from point A to point B faster by taking shortest route, react and respond more quickly (ex. when issued to change direction), and rarely get stuck. Yes the units are smarter, but these improvements shouldn't completely diminish the micro element.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
No, there has been plenty of progress. Destructable terrains, controllable strategic points, smoke/grass cover, etc. You may not like it, but many of us do, and it sure was a progress to the genre.
I really can't see the connection between smart unit pathing and e-sports from developing, so I can't comment there.
Bendez you are trolling hard in this thread man. And if you aren't then youre doing a good job of not making your occasional valid ideas seen through your bs generalizations.
Smoke/grass cover is just a gimmick if there's no skill involved microing 24 lings v 24 lings or using a zealot and a probe to harrass a SCV line. And believe it or not, there are control points in SCBW, they're called chokes, high ground, ramps, ridges, etc. You don't need a designated "control point" to have points important to control on a map, it's called positioning, which I've seen little of in SC2. It's not interesting to see one SCV chilling at a watch tower and gaining vision of the map early game... like, it sees nothing a majority of the time and it's useless because army positioning is less important in SC2 anyways. What is interesting is tank positioning on strategic points of the map in TvT, or using mutalisks to keep a terran in his base so you can establish a third, or sneaking your army to the high ground on Neo Tornado so you can contain a protoss at his choke... what's interesting about having a single unit chilling at a watch tower? :/
And btw, destructible terrain is in BW... temples? Generators? Eggs? Etc? All those things like "this expansion can only be unlocked when you break this down!" has been done before. Look at Hitchhiker, Battle Royal or Neo Arkanoid as examples. There's plenty. It's not innovative at all because its been done in BW many times over.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
But it is not gone. You are speaking as if there is auto-surround button that you can click and forget. You still need to micro your lings to kill that early scout, anticipate its route and then close in. In SC2, units move from point A to point B faster by taking shortest route, react and respond more quickly (ex. when issued to change direction), and rarely get stuck. Yes the units are smarter, but these improvements shouldn't completely diminish the micro element.
Are you even in the beta? Have you ever seen what lings do to scouting workers because you wouldn't say this if you had the beta.
We all know that both W3 and SC1 are the very top e-sport games (compared to other RTS games). In my opinion, the main reason SC2 will fall in the "other RTS games" category, is this: -Blizzard really exaggerated when they reduced units glitching. They clump together way too much than they should. Why this sucks: It makes battles look way less impressive than in SC1 or W3, because armies look so much smaller now, and because the exaggerated improved AI makes the fights end really fast, since units find a way to attack alot more easier/faster, even if you fight on a very narrow spot on the map. This is the reason why fast expands are harder to take. If your opponent has more units, it doesn't matter if you have the positional advantage because of the "improved AI". So now the term of fighting for the terrain advantage is kinda gone, because it doesn't matter where you pick the fight if you have more units (the exceptions are too few, to make it matter). Not once you can see the players simply mass an army in their base, and then try to a-move hoping they have more units. No more need to fight for map center etc ... they tried to introduce those Xel naga watch towers or w/e they're called, but seriously ... no one really cares about them as long as they have the better macro. Back to Warcraft 3, you can see they improved the units AI compared to SC1, but it's not as exaggerated as it's in SC2. It's almost the best way it can be. Try to see how 12ghouls move around map in W3, and how 12 zerglings move in SC2. I think I detailed above what Ret meant by: "I really hate how in sc2, micro is almost non existant. Combined with the easy macro, you have a really dumb simple game right now that almost anyone can be good at." The macro changes Blizzard made are fine, but don't take away the beauty of how a fight looked in SC1/W3, because then SC2 will never be a e-sport game (from observers point of view especially). Also Blizzard should work on units colours because, for example, it doesn't matter if zerglings/zealots are green or yellow -> they kinda look the same on a online streamed game.
PS: I'm not a top player, so some things I said above might not be 100% true, but I hope you got the main idea.
On February 25 2010 21:18 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
Yeah exactly. To me the very easy and simple answer to the micro problem is keep it simple.
Example: Whenever you make a unit go somewhere goes to the place in a straight line if possible. If there are obstacles it goes around the obstacles in the shortest distance possible. If there are units clumping in a tight choke the units queue up behind each other without going backwards (like they do i BW which is bad).
This way the units do not behave retardidly, but still just do the most simple move possible, not surround automatically etc. and leaves perfect control to the player, thereby making him responsible for both good/pimp moves and bad/fail moves.
Similar rules could easily be applied to attacking (attack command = attack closest available enemy, if not in range walk in straight line to the closest enemy attacking).
But I guess they just want to make the casual gamer happy, who wants to watch big armies clashing in a realistic and good way with intense clicking. Bleh.
There is no "auto-surround". Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
On February 25 2010 20:33 Eury wrote: I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Please name 1 rts game that hasn't been a complete failure in the last decade. Tick tock tick tock tick tock. Times up moron, there have been none! so what is this progress you're talking about? Is it you being able to build 10 battlecruisers simultaneously in sc2 and comps stomp the ai?
Warcraft III, Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire, the Warhammer 40K games, Supreme Commmander all sold well and were well liked.
I mean, only WC3 had a proscene really, but that really isn't a games success; its a very small part of it.
Do you guys even want a sequel? Or did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
They did alright in sales, but WC3 is the only one of those games that has ever had any kind of real competitive community. DoW in particular, even its top players will agree its a total joke on the highest level as it is incredibly shallow and unbalanced. SC, on the other hand, has sold copies regularly for over a decade (well over 10x the amount of the games you mentioned) because it has a competitive circuit, and monetary payout to match, that well outweighs WCG several times over (I'm only mentioning that specifically because as far as I know no Supreme Commander tournament has ever had a payout worth mentioning). I'm not sure its unreasonable to expect SC2 to carry on that same legacy.
"We", as in those people who enjoy BW at its highest level because it has many many things no other RTS has ever had, are hoping SC2 has a similar experience. Its too early to tell but these concerns have merit.
On February 25 2010 20:33 Eury wrote: I'm afraid that having broken path finding and dumb AI won't happen in SC 2 no matter how much you complain about it. If you want that go and play SC:BW, last time I checked it worked just fine.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Please name 1 rts game that hasn't been a complete failure in the last decade. Tick tock tick tock tick tock. Times up moron, there have been none! so what is this progress you're talking about? Is it you being able to build 10 battlecruisers simultaneously in sc2 and comps stomp the ai?
Warcraft III, Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire, the Warhammer 40K games, Supreme Commmander all sold well and were well liked.
I mean, only WC3 had a proscene really, but that really isn't a games success; its a very small part of it.
Do you guys even want a sequel? Or did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
They did alright in sales, but WC3 is the only one of those games that has ever had any kind of real competitive community. DoW in particular, even its top players will agree its a total joke on the highest level as it is incredibly shallow and unbalanced. SC, on the other hand, has sold copies regularly for over a decade (well over 10x the amount of the games you mentioned) because it has a competitive circuit, and monetary payout to match, that well outweighs WCG several times over, so I'm not sure its unreasonable to expect SC2 to carry on that same legacy.
"We", as in those people who enjoy BW at its highest level because it has many many things no other RTS has ever had, are hoping SC2 has a similar experience. Its too early to tell but these concerns have merit.
Just to make things clear; Warcraft 3 outsold Starcraft.
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Actual destructible terrain, being able to zoom out as far as you want, units that can move and shoot, units that act realistic, units that take cover, units that can take care of themself, less base building etc are things many consider are things that have progressed the genre in the last decade or so.
Now, I'm perfectly fine with Starcraft being a more arcade experience, but many want more realistic battles and unit behavior, while at the same time cutting out (what they view is boring) base building. If you don't believe me just compare Starcraft with Company of Heroes on metacritic.
How exactly is this progress for the RTS genre? Realism doesn't add anything to competitiveness or strategic depth, which imo are the two most important aspects of an RTS. To me it sounds as if you want a realistic war SIMULATION, not an RTS. Blizzard stated that they want SC2 to help bring professional gaming to another level. Most of the TL community wants SC2 to achieve that. A realistic simulation doesn't provide anything to achive that task. You don't need realism to create a competitive platform. You need a game that is hard (or rather: impossible) to master.
It's the same with other sports: I don't know of any popular discipline where it is easy to be up there with the pros. This aspect is most important.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
On February 25 2010 22:36 BlackYoshi wrote: So you guys just want the Brood War AI? Got it.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
You just want your units to do everything for you? Got it.
Wc3 Path finding would do fine as well by the way
Units not being to move up a ramp properly is what made the game much more strategic. Holding those high ground expos with a ramp was a big benefit because a small force could often times hold twice its size. Other than that nothing can be called awful.
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
On February 25 2010 22:36 BlackYoshi wrote: So you guys just want the Brood War AI? Got it.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
Right, and the problem here is that one of blizzard's goals is to sell to a gazillion people (this they will accomplish no matter what, although UI improvements or whatever it is 'we hate' help) while their other goal is to make a stable, longstanding E-SPORTS GAME (ie what BW is/has done - this will also sell a gazillion copies but in a longer timespan). These aren't necessarily complimentary goals, usually if an RTS has neat features and is fun casually it means it has little or no long term depth. SC2 may or may not follow this pattern, but the current build definitely raises an eyebrow or two.
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: Do you guys even want a sequel? Or did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
People on this site want a worthy successor for the best competitive RTS game ever, a game that you can enjoy and improve at for years to come.
Ok lets pretend they made sc2 hard. Who is going to refuse to buy it because of this? they might be annoyed that blizzard didn't make the game play it self but I think if anyone was going to buy it is still going to. The problem is that if its a joke on the competitive side it will just die
On February 25 2010 22:36 BlackYoshi wrote: So you guys just want the Brood War AI? Got it.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
We realize this, which is why I originally said I don't think Blizzard will change these things. What are you arguing with actually? Because no one says this game will sell more copies if they take out these things. The only argument brought up is that it'll be more competitive long term and more suitable to high end e-sports. Blizzard has shown to care about some of these factors, moreso than other gaming companies.
Who knows what they will do. Personally I think it's a shame non-Blizzard companies prefer a high selling quick gimmick over building a really solid reputation that will take you decades. SC2 is going to sell huge enormous numbers solely based on the reputation Blizzard has. That is the reputation of being able to build a game that can be played at the highest level 10+ years after the release.
On February 25 2010 22:37 heyoka wrote: Cite a source please. The only number I've ever heard were ~11million for SC and ~5 for WC3 (their wikipedias agree but doubtful those are accurate).
Well, Blizzard hates giving out proper numbers. Surprisingly they gave out Starcraft's sell numbers in an earnings call a while back (11 million), and we know that the Diablo franchise had sold 18.5 million when Diablo 3 was announced. Rob Pardo said at GDC 09 that Warcraft 3 was their most succesful game before WoW. You can draw your own conclusions and interpretations from that.
Anyway this whole conversion is horrible offtopic and I apologize that I even brought it up.
You just give people material to work with when you say BW has dumb units. They aren't dumb, they just dont go around doing things on their own. When you call them dumb noobs start saying you want dumb AI when you want REGULAR AI
The biggest complain I have seen from the general gaming audience regarding Starcraft 2 is that its way too old school, and it have ignored all progress that have been made in the genre for the last decade. Blizzard isn't going to further fuel such sentiments with dumbing down the AI even more.
Progress in the genre?
There has only been regress since the release of BW. I'm serious. There is a reason an 11 year old game is the only game that has made pro-gaming viable.
Blizzard isn't solely creating this game for the Team Liquid crowd, in fact its surprisingly how similar it is to SC:BW considering the gap between them in both time and technology. Which is fine by me, less so by others.
Which is scary. They are trying to cater people who have no idea about e-sports and professional gaming and are just looking for a few good months of fun. It's well within Blizzards rights to do whatever they want and they should pick whatever route they feel is best for their company. As a fan of professional gaming though it is precisely that line of thought that has kept e-sports from developing.
SC2 will have a huge scene much bigger than WC3. It will have tons of tournaments where all kinds of top players will win good sums of money and have solid sponsorships, but transcending the gaming scene the way BW did in Korea is still a big question mark.
No, there has been plenty of progress. Destructable terrains, controllable strategic points, smoke/grass cover, etc. You may not like it, but many of us do, and it sure was a progress to the genre.
I really can't see the connection between smart unit pathing and e-sports from developing, so I can't comment there.
Bendez you are trolling hard in this thread man. And if you aren't then youre doing a good job of not making your occasional valid ideas seen through your bs generalizations.
Smoke/grass cover is just a gimmick if there's no skill involved microing 24 lings v 24 lings or using a zealot and a probe to harrass a SCV line. And believe it or not, there are control points in SCBW, they're called chokes, high ground, ramps, ridges, etc. You don't need a designated "control point" to have points important to control on a map, it's called positioning, which I've seen little of in SC2. It's not interesting to see one SCV chilling at a watch tower and gaining vision of the map early game... like, it sees nothing a majority of the time and it's useless because army positioning is less important in SC2 anyways. What is interesting is tank positioning on strategic points of the map in TvT, or using mutalisks to keep a terran in his base so you can establish a third, or sneaking your army to the high ground on Neo Tornado so you can contain a protoss at his choke... what's interesting about having a single unit chilling at a watch tower? :/
And btw, destructible terrain is in BW... temples? Generators? Eggs? Etc? All those things like "this expansion can only be unlocked when you break this down!" has been done before. Look at Hitchhiker, Battle Royal or Neo Arkanoid as examples. There's plenty. It's not innovative at all because its been done in BW many times over.
Smoke/grass cover is not a gimmick. It breaks line of sight, so one could use it to their advantage. For instance, I've seen a replay by KHB where his banelings were hiding behind a smoke to ambush marines. When I said strategic points, I was talking more like COH strategic points, hope that clear things up. Map control does not equal Controlling strategic points. As for destructible terrain in BW, you're right. It is just that SC2 integrated it better and designed maps around it.
I know! Why don't they just put in a ''PRO'' button / mode / short cut. This way when you're bored of the campaign / ''normal'' multilayer, you can just press that button and you get a tweaked version of the game with all the ''pro/esports'' features. Then everybody is happy?
Yeah it will be quite an additional development effort to implement this but will it not be worth it?
Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
I don't get why Blizzard have "This unit is on a move command, and will not attack/engage in battle...", when clearly their AI turns move commands into attack commands all the time.
Rather they should have the following text over the move button: "This unit is on a move command, but may at the discretion of Blizzards AI algorithm start chase an enemy worker, or engage a bunch of of zerglings, or greet with a group of zealots despite being severely outmatched".
I'm positive they've done this to please the hordes of noobs who know no better than to right click in every conceivable situation in an RTS game.
I also agree about the micro part. The AI is just too smart, there's hardly any point in setting up an arc before a battle because by the time your forces reach the opponents' troops they will have clumped up again. Running away with units positioned in a horisontal line and at the same time attacking with melee units is impossible since they clump up in stupid formations everytime you click. And if you try to manually select, say, 3 out of 6 zealots and move them into position before you attack their move command just fucking turns into an attack command and you end up with 3 zealots charging and 3 running away, so you start spam clicking move again and they return into their stupid clumped formation.
On February 25 2010 21:02 cerebralz wrote: I know what the doubters are saying, and i don't disagree totally. However, what is the alternative? As a developer, it doesn't make sense to not improve the pathing or the unit AI, or have smart-casting, or any number of things you're talking about. It's a newer, different game and it should be improved over the older one. The fact that pro players had to have these ridiculous skills to overcome the "dumbness" of the BW unit AI to do what they want them to do, doesn't mean that they should intentionally make it that way in SC2.
A lot of things we watch in BW are game 'bugs' that ultimately became entertaining. I can see the purist fan wanting to see some of that because they are used to being entertained in a certain way with BW. I get that. From a spectator perspective, it was exciting, and very clear to see Boxer dancing wraiths around carriers, or 3 marines dodging lurker spines, or July raping a whole base with 6 mutas, or 10 goliaths holding against 2 control groups of mutas. Keep in mind this is a different game. You won't see things like pushing up vultures through mineral lines, or muta-stacking, or hold position lurkers.
There's a lot of time between now and when the 3rd installment hits the shelves. A lot can change, but some advancements should stay.
Improving the pathing makes perfect sense. But SC is a game of chess. Don't let the pieces make (too many) intelligent moves on their own. Provide the pieces but don't have your pawns make all the right moves by default. There is no improvement there except for technological. It's not a 'dumbness' not to have them. It's putting the game out there in an objective state so that people can come up with the right moves. It is crucial for game makers to understand this. For the past decade no one got it except for Blizzard.
qft. exactly my thoughts.
who could measure, how could you express the geniusness of e.g. piano play, painting, brood war if there was an instance in the background that made the right moves for you? bw is a form of art, of very high skill and thus it's a misconception imho to take away steps from the players/artists in their individual/creative performance. the game becomes shallow, so the exact opposite of what bw is
Perhaps smarter AI will put more emphasis on other aspects of the game, such as map control, backdoor, guerrilla warfare, etc. I don't think game will become shallow. Emphasis will be shifted towards other aspect of the game, and I think this is good thing.
On February 25 2010 11:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Zergling surround and worker micro is something that was so important to the early game of BW that decided games based on how you performed it.
so you are saying this gone is a good thing, bendez? in every little detail of the game can be significance for the final outcome, so it may very well be that certain aspects of strategy games will have more emphasis in sc2, only that those are not what made bw such a great and ridiculously highly skilled game. guess why they called savior the maestro - not because the game took control from him in his ability to orchestrate beautiful and deadly attacks to crush his opponents.
But it is not gone. You are speaking as if there is auto-surround button that you can click and forget. You still need to micro your lings to kill that early scout, anticipate its route and then close in. In SC2, units move from point A to point B faster by taking shortest route, react and respond more quickly (ex. when issued to change direction), and rarely get stuck. Yes the units are smarter, but these improvements shouldn't completely diminish the micro element.
Just that the impact you had on these kind of situations has gotten way less and is thus way less demanding for a player('s skills). Trust in what people like Nazgul, Smuft and ret say. They know what they're talking about and what a worthy successor of SCI should consist of (competition wise). Of course SCII is not made particularly for the hardcore progaming fans but this is TL.net, this is the mecca of korean progaming outside korea and of course the one big question here is whether SCII will develop to a degree where it can be said that it provides(/demands) the same level of play(/skill) we saw in SCI. I find the chess comparison very good. Who would really want to play a form of chess where the board may look a bit more fancy but the game itself has been simplified for the sake of the masses? (Not the ones who cherish the deep and complex form of the original game)
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
bw pathing is horrible please dont bring it back. I havent played sc2 yet but the pathing is so painful in bw its one of the reasons you need to play 12 hrs a day to maintain a high level of play.
On February 25 2010 20:57 ret wrote: I really hate how in sc2, micro is almost non existant. Combined with the easy macro, you have a really dumb simple game right now that almost anyone can be good at. >.<
What are the exact micro moves that are present in BW and not anymore in SC2? Could you guys be more precise?
Apart from the "auto-surround" which is as already said just better pathing. (A-move some glings against zealots they'll just try to hit him in the back if there's already a gling in front)
What's exactly the micro missing from SC2? I'm trying to understand since so far i find the game enjoyable to watch and play.
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
On February 25 2010 21:14 Nafaltar wrote: I find it hilarious how people say that micro is none existent in SC2 while it is the fact that micro is much more important compared to macro in the sequel that is allowing WC3 players to take a number of top spots. In BW micro on 3 zealots won't save you from 18 speedlings either. Its just that BW has been figured out to a very high degree so most of the time armys will be fairly even matched when they do clash, because both players know what works and how to be able to do this. While in most SC2 games at the moment one player lucks out and gets a BO win or one player is just vastly better than another. Yes a few micro elements have gone missing but we did get a couple new ones aswell.
wc3 players are taking top spots for the following reasons: 1. not everyone has a beta key and I'm guessing you included because you don't know anything 2. the game is easier and wc3 players are competent enough to be good at it
Micro isn't more important than macro or any stupid simplification like that. Macro and macro were reduced and everything got easier. You had to do everything at once in brood war while thinking about strategy at the same time, that's what made it so unique. It's not a click fest you morons
learn to play
Hi Audiohelper123,
It's hard to take your opinion seriously with all those childish insults. That is all .
Hi bendez
it's hard to take you seriously when you're stupid and don't know anything. That is all
That didn't totally make his point...seriously how old are you?
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
I was specificaly talking about the improved AI autosurround... so yes you are right that you can both cater to hardcore and casual in general. What i meant was you can't have no autosurround and auto surround at the same time. You either have improved AI or more control over your units. I appologize if I wasn't clear enough in my post.
There is no such thing as auto surround! It is a result the improved AI pathfinding. You cannot have one without the other. Why do you guys make such absurd terms as autosurround when they don't exist. "Autosurround" works like this
6 Zealots are told to attack a Thor. Zealots 1-3 engage in melee combat while Zealots 4-6 are behind. Since Zealots 1-3 has taken the front spots of the Thor, they now become obstacles to Zealots 4-6. Zealots 4-6 now make their way around Zealots 1-3 since they are blocking their path to attack the Thor. They will now attack the Thor in the nearest possible vacant spots which are its sides. Zealots 4-6 are now in position to attack the Thor. And thus, resulting into a surround.
Blizzard should add two modes to the game. Dumb mode and smart mode. Dumb mode is where the units act like they do in sc1. Workers need to be manually told what to do, no smart casting, none of the new A.I., now macro simplifier etc. Smart mode would be like war3 and the current sc2, where everything is simplified, A.I. is smarter, auto-mining, etc. I think this would satisfy everyone.
On February 25 2010 23:46 flabortaster wrote: There is no such thing as auto surround! It is a result the improved AI pathfinding. You cannot have one without the other. Why do you guys make such absurd terms as autosurround when they don't exist. "Autosurround" works like this
6 Zealots are told to attack a Thor. Zealots 1-3 engage in melee combat while Zealots 4-6 are behind. Since Zealots 1-3 has taken the front spots of the Thor, they now become obstacles to Zealots 4-6. Zealots 4-6 now make their way around Zealots 1-3 since they are blocking their path to attack the Thor. They will now attack the Thor in the nearest possible vacant spots which are its sides. Zealots 4-6 are now in position to attack the Thor. And thus, resulting into a surround.
When they surround automatically you're not allowed to call it autosurround because it is the result of some other feature? Please stop arguing dumb ridiculous linguistic facts. People take you serious and have replied to your points please return the favor or don't post at all.
Many other competitive games have done it in the past, quake, cod, etc. Basicly a mod that tweaks certain values for better balance, changes to things to allow for more skillfull play.
Blizzard could then introduce 20 new mothership type units, make everything easy, but the competitive community still has their "version" of the game for competitive play.
And things get balanced by the community then.
Problems that I see with this: I don't know if this would actually be possible with the map editor Not being able to play ranked games with it And ofcourse the things that have happened in the past with these kind of things, for example the cpma vs OSP type of stuff etc.
On February 25 2010 23:46 flabortaster wrote: There is no such thing as auto surround! It is a result the improved AI pathfinding. You cannot have one without the other. Why do you guys make such absurd terms as autosurround when they don't exist. "Autosurround" works like this
6 Zealots are told to attack a Thor. Zealots 1-3 engage in melee combat while Zealots 4-6 are behind. Since Zealots 1-3 has taken the front spots of the Thor, they now become obstacles to Zealots 4-6. Zealots 4-6 now make their way around Zealots 1-3 since they are blocking their path to attack the Thor. They will now attack the Thor in the nearest possible vacant spots which are its sides. Zealots 4-6 are now in position to attack the Thor. And thus, resulting into a surround.
Who cares... as long as one can identify what we are talking about... autosurround or improved AI. Everyone has the idea of surrounding the unit in their heads. It's like saying technically 2+4 not necessarily = 6, Since 2+4 = 1 (mod 5).
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
I was specificaly talking about the improved AI autosurround... so yes you are right that you can both cater to hardcore and casual in general. What i meant was you can't have no autosurround and auto surround at the same time. You either have improved AI or more control over your units. I appologize if I wasn't clear enough in my post.
Spoiler cause I don't want my replies to take up so much room lol .
That makes sense, but again I think this is one of those things that crosses the boundary blizzard needs to establish between the casual crowd and hardcore crowd. It just makes it too easy. Pathfinding is fine cause no1 wants units glitching but this and the instant macro feature would be like auto aim in Halo and auto-steering in a racing game. To draw on the same analogy, fixing pathfinding and unit gltches (DAM YOU DRAGOONS!) would be like allowing ppl in a racing game to have automatic gear shifting, while custom gear shifting would appease the hardcore crowd. Fine right? Yes. But add auto-steer and then it leans way too much on the casual side.
Don't get me wrong tho, a feature to turn things like multiple building select and "auto micro" on and off would be just as stupid...you need to stick to one
On February 25 2010 23:46 flabortaster wrote: There is no such thing as auto surround! It is a result the improved AI pathfinding. You cannot have one without the other. Why do you guys make such absurd terms as autosurround when they don't exist. "Autosurround" works like this
6 Zealots are told to attack a Thor. Zealots 1-3 engage in melee combat while Zealots 4-6 are behind. Since Zealots 1-3 has taken the front spots of the Thor, they now become obstacles to Zealots 4-6. Zealots 4-6 now make their way around Zealots 1-3 since they are blocking their path to attack the Thor. They will now attack the Thor in the nearest possible vacant spots which are its sides. Zealots 4-6 are now in position to attack the Thor. And thus, resulting into a surround.
Who cares... as long as one can identify what we are talking about... autosurround or improved AI. Everyone has the idea of surrounding the unit in their heads. It's like saying technically 2+4 not necessarily = 6, Since 2+4 = 1 (mod 5).
Well, it is actually pretty important to point out that there isn't an "auto surround feature" that Blizzard can just disable. If they want to remove it they have to dumb down their AI and break their path finding, and that just won't happen.
Instead of arguing the same thing in futility I suggest people try to come up with ways how to improve the skill celling in both micro and macro without tempering with the UI or AI.
On February 25 2010 22:55 bendez wrote: As for destructible terrain in BW, you're right. It is just that SC2 integrated it better and designed maps around it.
Actually the only real difference is graphics. And the name. Because "destructible rocks" sounds so awesome (well imo it sounds like a joke).
First of all, good maps are NOT designed around something like destructible rocks. Things like destructible rocks are USED to implement a good map concept. In the current SC2 maps the destructible rocks barely have anything to do with map concepts, they were mostly added for the show. Second: They are only slightly better integrated (excluding the graphical integration). Well, I don't have the beta, but the only improvable things from a gameplay perspective are: attack via right click and minimap color.
On February 26 2010 00:00 flabortaster wrote: Elitist fucks...
Get out. Get out now. TL does need trash like you.
On February 26 2010 00:05 Squallcloud wrote: What do the units do in BW when their path is blocked when they attack a group of unit?
Well if you don't micro your zerglings well in a zvz, then the other zerglings will sit behind the others, and wait till a spot opens up. IE you are basically only fighting with half of your army, while the other half waits in line lol. That is why it is very important to always make sure that your zerglings can have the maximum surface area on the enemy. Generally the idea of an arc or concave is used, to maximize your zerglings and DPS output.
This isnt going to change, it isnt as simple as the ablities to micro not being there. It's the AI removing the possibility of micro that we are used to.
Honestly the only real way for the type of micro we are used to be brought back, is for the AI of sc2 to be dumbed down a crazy amount. Thats not going to happen, the thought that auto surround should be removed (as the above poster pointed out it is important to note that auto surround is NOT a feature but just smarter AI) cant happen with out massive changes to the structure of the AI to more archaic forms or even intentionally breaking it to causs units to have dumb moments.
Sc2 will have to evolve new ways to micro, it'll have to turn into its own strenghts and grow from that. This really isn't a discussion that will lead anywhere, as there is no real fix outside of destroying there own AI to bring back what some of us want, and blizzard will never do that.
Right now with zerglings it is still more effective to run your group halfway past the enemy before attacking, as this will surround the enemy faster than the AI will.
Zealots will probably be on a-move with or without autosurround, because of the way their charge works.
The only other issue with autosurround that I can think of off the top of my head is workers become much better fighters, so I guess early rushers will have to be more careful.
It's all just a question of balance. Starcraft is not chess because it is real time and no human can directly control a hundred of units in real time. Automation is inevitable, and is actually present everywhere in SC1. SCVs auto-mine, rally points auto-move, units auto-target and medics auto-heal. It is very clear what you mean when you claim that units are too smart, but as many have noted, auto-surround was not intentionally programmed into the units AI and is just a natural consequence of better pathing. You cannot expect Blizzard to deliberately worsen the pathing algorithms, can you? That would make no sense at all. Instead, opportunities to exert direct control over units must be created elsewhere. Why not make a unit that you do not want to surround? Let it have something like immolation in Warcraft. Why not have a melee unit with a strong AoE attack (firebat, archon), that you rather run away from? Why not have dodgeable attacks, like lurker spines?
I think it's not the smart units that is the problem, it's the lack of creativity in unit design.
Yes, some of the new features are bull. BUT! the good gamers will find ways around this. Right now the maps are too narrow and don't allow for many good flanking opportunities etc. When you can set up a 3 hotkey flank, target units with their specific hardcounters in your army (eg: immortal targets armored unit, collosus targets infantry, etc) Also, dancing still seems to exist and later when people are expoing with as few units as possible beforehand/able to counter any superior-army-at-that-moment rush (like we did in sc1) micro will definitely come into play. I myself have had SOME beta experience (not very much however) and from what I saw a good few of the basics still applied. Point is, I feel that with the amount of brilliant rts players who are analyzing this game, it will still evolve rapidly with very specific/mechanic demanding play. No, it won't be as hard as SCBW mechanic-wise--but strategetically, tactically, and in some areas of micro as well I think it will transfer. Macro IMO is mostly fine--the principles of trying to out-expand/out-army/out-tech your opponent still exists with scouting being a critical ingredient. It's different but I wouldn't give up hope yet.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
On February 26 2010 00:05 Squallcloud wrote: What do the units do in BW when their path is blocked when they attack a group of unit?
Well if you don't micro your zerglings well in a zvz, then the other zerglings will sit behind the others, and wait till a spot opens up. IE you are basically only fighting with half of your army, while the other half waits in line lol. That is why it is very important to always make sure that your zerglings can have the maximum surface area on the enemy. Generally the idea of an arc or concave is used, to maximize your zerglings and DPS output.
Thank you
Is this point the only complaint about micro? It's not enough to say the game suck in my opinion.
PS : This thread sounds like the Wow forums with the war casual against hardcore gamer. It's funny since there's some sort of general opinion the Sc player is superior to the Wow player
On February 26 2010 00:32 Squallcloud wrote: Thank you
Is this point the only complaint about micro? It's not enough to say the game suck in my opinion.
PS : This thread sounds like the Wow forums with the war casual against hardcore gamer. It's funny since there's some sort of general opinion the Sc player is superior to the Wow player
The game doesn't suck. It's probably guaranteed to be the 2nd/3rd (SC/WC3) best RTS by default of every other RTS sucking balls.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
If i may add something aren't you people thinking in BW rules while maybe you should think in SC2 rules?
Like in BW i can guess someone tought well my gling are dumb what can i do to increase their efficiency-> ok i can put them in this formation for a better attack surface.
In SC2 : well after 10 years of evolution Kerrigan made my gling with a bigger brain than before and they take the available surface to attack on their own what can i do to improve that?
On February 26 2010 00:32 Squallcloud wrote: Thank you
Is this point the only complaint about micro? It's not enough to say the game suck in my opinion.
PS : This thread sounds like the Wow forums with the war casual against hardcore gamer. It's funny since there's some sort of general opinion the Sc player is superior to the Wow player
The game doesn't suck. It's probably guaranteed to be the 2nd/3rd (SC/WC3) best RTS by default of every other RTS sucking balls.
Really? Just cause they dont have a proscene means they all suck? Other than that what do the Blizzard games have that sets them so much apart.
On February 26 2010 00:00 flabortaster wrote: Elitist fucks...
Get out. Get out now. TL does need trash like you.
On February 26 2010 00:05 Squallcloud wrote: What do the units do in BW when their path is blocked when they attack a group of unit?
Well if you don't micro your zerglings well in a zvz, then the other zerglings will sit behind the others, and wait till a spot opens up. IE you are basically only fighting with half of your army, while the other half waits in line lol. That is why it is very important to always make sure that your zerglings can have the maximum surface area on the enemy. Generally the idea of an arc or concave is used, to maximize your zerglings and DPS output.
Thank you
Is this point the only complaint about micro? It's not enough to say the game suck in my opinion.
PS : This thread sounds like the Wow forums with the war casual against hardcore gamer. It's funny since there's some sort of general opinion the Sc player is superior to the Wow player
no you cannot think that simple zergling micro example is all there is too it. I am just assuming that from the types of questions your asking youre new? If you want to try and get an understanding of where we are coming from you can watch a few pro games. Take special notice of ealry un it position and the types of army movements inside of a big battle. I am sure that if you watch a few you will come to understand.
Of course playing the game will give you the best experience. But as I said before it is not fair to say " ooh that zergling thing is the only complaint" I am on an itouch so I really can't type out all the pages to try and discribe the many unit positions lol I just hope you can under stand
Also he'll yes SC is better than any wow wc3 trash. Sc has the biggest pro scene for a reason you know
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
A lot of trolls and or idiots in this thread..and whats with that guy calling us "elitist fucks" when we are just trying to make the game more enjoyable and long lasting.
the feeling of microing your units well and winning a battle that you shouldn't have won is AWESOME. I don't see why that should be replaced with attack move.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
You`re not stating your opinion, but claiming some "facts", which are totaly wrong.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
You have a troll ID, a troll post count, a troll opinion based on troll facts, with a troll way of writing. Nobody is going to take you seriously, you are a troll.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
You`re not stating your opinion, but claiming some "facts", which are totaly wrong.
which facts did i mention? did i give evidence for them to be called facts or might it be that it is indeed just my opinion?
if i stated facts care about giving some evidence that they are wrong?
On February 26 2010 00:52 Squallcloud wrote: If i may add something aren't you people thinking in BW rules while maybe you should think in SC2 rules?
Like in BW i can guess someone tought well my gling are dumb what can i do to increase their efficiency-> ok i can put them in this formation for a better attack surface.
In SC2 : well after 10 years of evolution Kerrigan made my gling with a bigger brain than before and they take the available surface to attack on their own what can i do to improve that?
wow. You are the type of player blizz is catering too and it's just mind numbing how baseless your oppinions are I am so sad right now
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
You have a troll ID, a troll post count, a troll opinion based on troll facts, with a troll way of writing. Nobody is going to take you seriously, you are a troll.
yes i am a troll, the easiest way for u to denie some truth in my posts that otherwise could break the pillars of ur perfect world.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
You`re not stating your opinion, but claiming some "facts", which are totaly wrong.
which facts did i mention? did i give evidence for them to be called facts or might it be that it is indeed just my opinion?
if i stated facts care about giving some evidence that they are wrong?
Instead of proving you wrong, I`ll give you free advice : calm down, read the 10 commandments, cut the trolling and the sarcasm to mininum, dont be so emotinal and dont start useless arguments.
Well people complaining about sc2 not being the same or almost the same as sc1, should just play sc1. iTcouLdbeWorsE actually has a point. People in sc1 memorized korean builds, copied them, and loose because they didnt think like them. Its like when flash said that his last build against P couldnt be copied just like that, because they are not him, the next minute there was a post of someone saying how you should play flash build, but ofcourse u cant do that, since they are not flash. And because they copy everything, they suck, because they stopped using their head.
Its the same here. They try to apply sc1 logic to sc2, even though its a very different game. Instead of creating and thinking, they do the same as in sc1, copying, just that it is even worse, beacuse they copy builds into a different game.
On February 25 2010 22:36 BlackYoshi wrote: So you guys just want the Brood War AI? Got it.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
You just want your units to do everything for you? Got it.
Wc3 Path finding would do fine as well by the way
Units not being to move up a ramp properly is what made the game much more strategic. Holding those high ground expos with a ramp was a big benefit because a small force could often times hold twice its size. Other than that nothing can be called awful.
This just in - bad pathfinding equals strategic. It may be "strategic" to you, but to the vast majority of people who played SC1 (and no matter how "influential" you think you are, there are still far more casual BNet players, even today, than ICCUPers), it was frustrating because your unit would not do what you told it to.
Blizzard is in the impossible sequel situation of having to please everyones wildest expectations. It just happens that your expectation is you want a re-skinned Brood War. Brood War is great but it has many design limitations that are downright archaic such as the lack of multibuilding selection and a limit of only 12 unit hotkeys (these are not "strategic" or intentional, they are the limits of an 11 year old system and only serve to hinder the intuitiveness of the game).
You guys need to take off your TeamLiquid colored glasses sometimes and realize that you are really a small niche of the people who played and STILL play Brood War.
However, from watching, I really think they need to add back in the 30% accuracy loss from shooting up hill. They say needing site is enough disadvantage, but when all you have to do is get 1-2 units up a ramp or just have a flying unit hover over it, it really negates any advantage from holding uphill terrain (which makes no sense in a military context)
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
Sorry to hear that SC2 is no game for you but i think SC2 Players are just frustrated that their Skill isn´t needed 100% anymore. The old ways of makro, mikro and so on is gone. Just get it. BUT There are new forms of Mikro, Makro, strategical and so on. You are missing the depth? Man its a Beta, you didn´t see any depth in Sc1 before release at all. In every single Replay i see, there are HUGE Mikromistakes, bad scouting, strategical and even tactical Failure and senseless Deaths of Units.
- Has limited micro capability<----Even in Proreps, there are so many huge mistakes a wc3 Player could cry! - Is not mechanically demanding<----what you think its a strength was a huge weakness for me. Complicated mechanics to make the units do what you want them todo. Now its easier to make them do what you want. BUT you still need to give the orders to do so and only your Orders should matter in a strategical game - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed<----Depth will develope in time. Right now you only see the Easiest way of Playing SC2 not the best. - Has poor excuses for APM sinks<----you need just enough to make the right orders. - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other.<---- Yes for now, but i doubt it will stay like this. It will develope. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game)<---Easy to learn, hard to master. Thats the way it should be.
Until this game is played long enough and mistakes vanish you simply can´t tell anything yet. Maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong.But right now its only a guess nothing more.
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
Brood War is the hardcore? Most of the people who still play BW are playing Big Game Hunter games, UMS, and other "casual" games. The ICCUP crowd is very small.
On February 26 2010 01:15 BlackYoshi wrote: However, from watching, I really think they need to add back in the 30% accuracy loss from shooting up hill. They say needing site is enough disadvantage, but when all you have to do is get 1-2 units up a ramp or just have a flying unit hover over it, it really negates any advantage from holding uphill terrain (which makes no sense in a military context)
Oh man, a military inaccuracy in starcraft? Alert blizzard, this was supposed to be the most realistic war game ever.
On February 26 2010 01:10 Samurai- wrote: Well people complaining about sc2 not being the same or almost the same as sc1, should just play sc1. iTcouLdbeWorsE actually has a point. People in sc1 memorized korean builds, copied them, and loose because they didnt think like them. Its like when flash said that his last build against P couldnt be copied just like that, because they are not him, the next minute there was a post of someone saying how you should play flash build, but ofcourse u cant do that, since they are not flash. And because they copy everything, they suck, because they stopped using their head.
Its the same here. They try to apply sc1 logic to sc2, even though its a very different game. Instead of creating and thinking, they do the same as in sc1, copying, just that it is even worse, beacuse they copy builds into a different game.
People copy strong builds until they gather enough knowledge and skills to improve those builds or create new, superior ones. That's perfectly reasonable.
People are using SC1 builds in SC2 because you have to start somewhere. If you just randomly put some stuff down you will suck just as much as you would if you follow an SC1 bo, just that with an actual bo in mind you have a plan and are not completely lost. If you followed the streams of some of the top platinum players (itcoulbeworse: that's why you are wrong), you would see that people have deviated from the pure SC1 builds and developed strong SC2 builds.
site still down for me, are you guys actually able to read it? if so could you please post an image or copy+paste the interviews (or direct me to the page they're on if this has already been done)
- Has limited micro capability - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other.
Do you seriously not bother to micro your units at all? Do you not focus fire individual units? Pull back and then re-engage with weakened units? Use your dropship to protect damaged units? Bait and then attack the enemy?
Auto-surround is simply a result of better pathfinding. It's the unit going "Oh, I can't attack that unit that I'm supposed to be so I'll go around". Sure, that's a very tiny bit of micro gone. In SC1, 3 zerglings could beat 1 zealot if microed properly and that same micro still applies in SC2 since 3 zerglings would, golly gosh, practically auto-surround in SC1 anyway.
- Is not mechanically demanding
It has the same mechanics as SC1 except they're streamlined. The noobs will still be terrible at the mechanics and end up massing 1k + minerals late game (as evidenced by a lot of streams and replays available) whereas the "pro" players will be spending their time perfectly.
- Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks
Lol.
- That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
Easier for casual players != more casual. Just because your average gamer can pick up and play it easier does not mean that they will suddenly become amazing at the game and a progamer. You won't see your mother playing SC2 in the proleagues and you know why? Because it's still a hard game to play properly
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
Brood War is the hardcore? Most of the people who still play BW are playing Big Game Hunter games, UMS, and other "casual" games. The ICCUP crowd is very small.
On February 25 2010 23:53 FictionJV wrote: And what about the possibility of a promod.
Many other competitive games have done it in the past, quake, cod, etc. Basicly a mod that tweaks certain values for better balance, changes to things to allow for more skillfull play.
Blizzard could then introduce 20 new mothership type units, make everything easy, but the competitive community still has their "version" of the game for competitive play.
And things get balanced by the community then.
Problems that I see with this: I don't know if this would actually be possible with the map editor Not being able to play ranked games with it And ofcourse the things that have happened in the past with these kind of things, for example the cpma vs OSP type of stuff etc.
This would do nothing but split the community, and ensure that very few people whose first Starcraft game is SC2 would join up, and then the game would stagnate and eventually die. IMO, when a community needs to alter the game to make it "competitive", it loses a lot of its appeal as a spectator game, because its no longer the game most of the spectators are familiar with and have played.
On February 25 2010 22:36 BlackYoshi wrote: So you guys just want the Brood War AI? Got it.
Realize that you are a very small minority, and people just want their units to work when they click to attack another unit. Even today, "competitive" SC players are a minority compared to the people who play BGH games or 3v3s for fun.
You all need to realize you're a small niche market and that the improvements won't cater to you because a lot of the stuff you want really isn't enjoyable for the common user (the awful attacking/movement AI of units in SC, especially if they had to go up ramps, or how unintuitive it was to do a surround because of how bad the pathfinding was)
You just want your units to do everything for you? Got it.
Wc3 Path finding would do fine as well by the way
Units not being to move up a ramp properly is what made the game much more strategic. Holding those high ground expos with a ramp was a big benefit because a small force could often times hold twice its size. Other than that nothing can be called awful.
This just in - bad pathfinding equals strategic. It may be "strategic" to you, but to the vast majority of people who played SC1 (and no matter how "influential" you think you are, there are still far more casual BNet players, even today, than ICCUPers), it was frustrating because your unit would not do what you told it to.
Blizzard is in the impossible sequel situation of having to please everyones wildest expectations. It just happens that your expectation is you want a re-skinned Brood War. Brood War is great but it has many design limitations that are downright archaic such as the lack of multibuilding selection and a limit of only 12 unit hotkeys (these are not "strategic" or intentional, they are the limits of an 11 year old system and only serve to hinder the intuitiveness of the game).
You guys need to take off your TeamLiquid colored glasses sometimes and realize that you are really a small niche of the people who played and STILL play Brood War.
We're mostly talking about micro issues here. Not saying multiple building selection or unlimited unit selection are bad. Read the comments before replying them please.
lol at people suggesting the unit ai be changed to inject micro, specifically nazgul. thats such a stupid mindset. i guarentee if the game is competitive there will be as much micro as brood war. i dont even have to play it to make this claim.
whenever anything 2 comes out, people complain how it's so much easier now, but in the end it requires more mechanical skill to play. this is true in almost every situation throughout history.
On February 26 2010 00:52 Squallcloud wrote: If i may add something aren't you people thinking in BW rules while maybe you should think in SC2 rules?
Like in BW i can guess someone tought well my gling are dumb what can i do to increase their efficiency-> ok i can put them in this formation for a better attack surface.
In SC2 : well after 10 years of evolution Kerrigan made my gling with a bigger brain than before and they take the available surface to attack on their own what can i do to improve that?
wow. You are the type of player blizz is catering too and it's just mind numbing how baseless your oppinions are I am so sad right now
What did i say?
Seemed to me like a reasonable tought. What's baseless?
I will say it again ITT: new people to Starcraft jumping on to a competitve Starcraft site and trying to tell me that they have great ideas about how starcrAft should play. Yep all the probes drones and scvs reAding this really know where me / most of the tl community is coming from when we talk about micro macro and mechanical skill.
Most of you have no idea what you are talking about. Forming baseless opinions about what sc1 is like when you don't competitevly play it is a joke. What's worse is these same people are then comparing sc2 to sc1. How can you try and tell me with a straight face that sc2 is better if you have never played sc1 at a competative level? He'll most of you don't even have the beta.
Most of the people disagreeing with nazgul and the more senior tl membors are simply casual gamers that jump from one shiny new game to another. Pro tip- stop talking about things you do not understand.
On February 26 2010 01:36 Misrah wrote: I will say it again ITT: new people to Starcraft jumping on to a competitve Starcraft site and trying to tell me that they have great ideas about how starcrAft should play. Yep all the probes drones and scvs reAding this really know where me / most of the tl community is coming from when we talk about micro macro and mechanical skill.
Most of you have no idea what you are talking about. Forming baseless opinions about what sc1 is like when you don't competitevly play it is a joke. What's worse is these same people are then comparing sc2 to sc1. How can you try and tell me with a straight face that sc2 is better if you have never played sc1 at a competative level? He'll most of you don't even have the beta.
Most of the people disagreeing with nazgul and the more senior tl membors are simply casual gamers that jump from one shiny new game to another. Pro tip- stop talking about things you do not understand.
Forming baseless opinions about people when you don't know them is a joke.
On February 26 2010 01:29 Chill wrote: lol at people suggesting the unit ai be changed to inject micro, specifically nazgul. thats such a stupid mindset. i guarentee if the game is competitive there will be as much micro as brood war. i dont even have to play it to make this claim.
whenever anything 2 comes out, people complain how it's so much easier now, but in the end it requires more mechanical skill to play. this is true in almost every situation throughout history.
Chill halo 2 to halo 2.5 was a big step backward. Don't you agree? Or what about melle to brawl?
On February 26 2010 01:29 Chill wrote: lol at people suggesting the unit ai be changed to inject micro, specifically nazgul. thats such a stupid mindset. i guarentee if the game is competitive there will be as much micro as brood war. i dont even have to play it to make this claim.
whenever anything 2 comes out, people complain how it's so much easier now, but in the end it requires more mechanical skill to play. this is true in almost every situation throughout history.
On February 26 2010 00:00 flabortaster wrote: Elitist fucks...
Get out. Get out now. TL does need trash like you.
On February 26 2010 00:05 Squallcloud wrote: What do the units do in BW when their path is blocked when they attack a group of unit?
Well if you don't micro your zerglings well in a zvz, then the other zerglings will sit behind the others, and wait till a spot opens up. IE you are basically only fighting with half of your army, while the other half waits in line lol. That is why it is very important to always make sure that your zerglings can have the maximum surface area on the enemy. Generally the idea of an arc or concave is used, to maximize your zerglings and DPS output.
Thank you
Is this point the only complaint about micro? It's not enough to say the game suck in my opinion.
PS : This thread sounds like the Wow forums with the war casual against hardcore gamer. It's funny since there's some sort of general opinion the Sc player is superior to the Wow player
Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Because Starcraft: Broodwar (I refuse to call it SC1 because SC2 more like WC4 MIRITE) is HARDCORE and you're just a NOOB who doesn't KNOW anything MAN, GOD. I bet you're some sort of CASUAL gamer who's never even HEARD of Starcraft 1 and just plays WORLD OF WARCRAFT because you're such a NOOB.
On February 26 2010 01:29 Chill wrote: i guarentee if the game is competitive there will be as much micro as brood war. i dont even have to play it to make this claim.
This part was very stupid. Almost to the level of bendez posts.
Micro is very limited in SC2 and some stuff is kinda retarded (like zergling chasing perfectly a worker so you can't scout at all). The game will be more revolved on builds, timings and strategy. It's not as entertaining as scbw if you watch it but still it should be fun to play.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
We should think how exactly the SC2 AI should be changed, so we can actually get some micro in this game. Is it me or the units box size is much smaller than their real size?? That should explain why the units are clumping in what looks a more exaggerated way than they should. If this is the case, while Blizzard managed to make the units move/attack more smoothly in a formation, they also removed some nice micro possibilities what made SC1/W3 a different game from RA3 for example.
I don't think that the pathing has to be "dumbed down" in order for there to be more exciting micro opportunities.
For example, some of the most micro intensive units in BW were that way because of the way they were designed. Vultures were very fast, very fragile, and there attack was came in largeer intervals. You got a huge benefit from intense micro not because of bad pathing but because of the way the unit worked. Same with mutas and reavers.
I think the solution is not to clamor for the same ai mechanics, but rather to ask blizzard to design units that benefit from micro. A lot of the new units in the game like thors, immortals, roaches, broodlords, etc. Are made in such a way that it isn't very hard to maximize their effectiveness.
On February 26 2010 01:29 Chill wrote: i guarentee if the game is competitive there will be as much micro as brood war. i dont even have to play it to make this claim.
This part was very stupid. Almost to the level of bendez posts.
Micro is very limited in SC2 and some stuff is kinda retarded (like zergling chasing perfectly a worker so you can't scout at all). The game will be more revolved on builds, timings and strategy. It's as entertaining as scbw if you watch it but still it should be fun to play.
How do you not notice his post is over the top-sarcastic and is simply made to troll people?
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
No matter how much you follow the pro scene, if you don't play the game a lot you wont understand, thx
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
Nothing else compares... SC2 has not hope then I guess.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
Because theres more to it than just move one foot forward and then the next. If you understood the technique, training, stamina, and physical conditioning required to compete at the olympics then you'd understand how hard it is to compete at that level and the dedication required.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
Because theres more to it than just move one foot forward and then the next. If you understood the technique, training, stamina, and physical conditioning required to compete at the olympics then you'd understand how hard it is to compete at that level and the dedication required.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
Because theres more to it than just move one foot forward and then the next. If you understood the technique, training, stamina, and physical conditioning required to compete at the olympics then you'd understand how hard it is to compete at that level and the dedication required.
I know that.
Now take what you just said and apply it to SC2.
Done. Macro and micro have become too easy, taking away the work and dedication required. Just remember that steroids are banned in the olympics
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
Because theres more to it than just move one foot forward and then the next. If you understood the technique, training, stamina, and physical conditioning required to compete at the olympics then you'd understand how hard it is to compete at that level and the dedication required.
I know that.
Now take what you just said and apply it to SC2.
Done. Macro and micro have become too easy, taking away the work and dedication required. Just remember that steroids are banned in the olympics
To continue with the shitty comparisons - does it make easier to compete in olympics if steroids get allowed (and everybody uses them naturally)?
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
Isn't it a little intuitive that the easier a game is to play the less distancing there is from pros?
Running is easy but I don't see you in the Olympics.
Because theres more to it than just move one foot forward and then the next. If you understood the technique, training, stamina, and physical conditioning required to compete at the olympics then you'd understand how hard it is to compete at that level and the dedication required.
I know that.
Now take what you just said and apply it to SC2.
Done. Macro and micro have become too easy, taking away the work and dedication required. Just remember that steroids are banned in the olympics
To continue with the shitty comparisons - does it make easier to compete in olympics if steroids get allowed (and everybody uses them naturally)?
Of course it does. Theres only so fast some1 can run and it lowers the commitment needed from the individual (although that limit might be slightly higher). Even with how hard SC is, the games pretty mch figured out. Even players like Flash are barely distinguishable from every1 else in terms of mechanics (flash even said so himself). With MBS that skill ceiling is going to come so much faster. This is all getting off topic though. Easier game --> not as competitive. It takes an idiot not to realize this
the more and more i look into and hear about SC2... The less i want to buy it.... i hope they fix these problems... i wish they would have pro gamers help them make some of these games and get their input while they are building the game rather than after.
On February 26 2010 02:29 ArchoN[VenoM] wrote: the more and more i look into and hear about SC2... The less i want to buy it.... i hope they fix these problems... i wish they would have pro gamers help them make some of these games and get their input while they are building the game rather than after.
They did have pro gamers on staff helping them make the game. Either they didn't listen to the pro gamers or the pro gamers didn't say "don't do this to micro."
What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Would someone PLEASE copy/paste these interviews I woke up like 7 hours ago and the site has been down the whole time. With 13 pages of arguing back and forth I refuse to believe that not one of you still has a tab open with all of it still there.
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community Hey kimberly, I am just writing this to you wondering when you would like to meet to work on our presentation. Feel free to give me a call anytime At 19202464963
hope to hear from you soon
Ben For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
Glad to see your begining to understand. And yes I am 100 percent serious. I don't think you know anything. And considering you probably have not played a true game of Starcraft in quite some time your opinions are out dated.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
Testie is the first guy to complain about bad responsiveness..Intresting.
I'm curious as to what the argument over 'auto-surround' comes from. Exactly what units are 'auto-surrounding'? Right now the only unit I've noticed that comes close to this is zergling/speedlings. Every other unit that came from SC1 behaves similarly to how they did in SC1, minus things like stacking.
Could this be simply a zergling problem and not an 'auto-surround' problem?
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
Day[9] should go play a game of HoN and then go back to SC on bnet 2.0. In HoN, it is pretty much like playing on lan. Even if it says you have 150 MS to server. All actions done are instant. In comparison, there is a massive delay that makes the user have to get used to the delay to perform micro as they want it. And it still won't be as they want it.
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
Testie is the first guy to complain about bad responsiveness..Intresting.
I also have what feels like 250ms delay, havent made me go "fuckin ARGH" yet, but im sure it will in the future.
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
Testie is the first guy to complain about bad responsiveness..Intresting.
I noticed the same when I played it. Everything just seemed to react slow
On February 26 2010 02:32 MYM.Testie wrote: What they need to work on is bnet 2.0 and the terrible lag it has. Seriously, just steal HoN's server interface. It's a lot better than bnet 2.0.
There's been times where I'm thinking, "wow I could do some really cool shit with my units" and then bnet 2.0 gets up in my face and says "rofl j/k here's some delay on every single action you take noob". It makes you feel like you're watching your game rather than being right in there playing it, in a sense.
Interesting. Day[9] was praising the netcode on his daily show the other night and I haven't heard this complaint from anywhere else
Day[9] should go play a game of HoN and then go back to SC on bnet 2.0. In comparison, there is a massive delay that makes the user have to get used to the delay to perform micro as they want it. And it still won't be as they want it.
I play a lot of HON--granted, nowhere near as much as you--and I find the responsiveness of SC2 pretty good :shrug: I think calling the difference in delay "massive" is probably exaggerating a great deal.
Of course there could be problems with server distance, since there probably aren't widespread servers to get the best possible midpoint between all players yet. So maybe I'm just lucky based on my location
Whenever something in your base is being attacked, they tell you precisely what it is. For example, if the probes are getting attacked, they say "Your Probes are under attack" instead of just "Your base is under attack." This greatly eliminates the element of surprise. Where as in the past when ever your base was all of a sudden being attacked by a cloak unit, triggering a panic as you frantically looked around to see what and where it was attacking, now you instantly know what's up.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
On February 26 2010 00:29 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote: [quote]
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
How does that not compute?
it does therefor not compute, because u:
a) only play competetive for 2 years b) are only C+/C c) u actually think ur better/more knowledgeable than u are
On February 26 2010 00:22 szm wrote: Smart AI makes manual surrounds, flanking and pre battle positioning obsolete. How can anyone even call that a feature or improvement?
No it doesn't.
Positioning and flanking is huge still (but I wish high ground positioning got an accuracy bonus)
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
On February 26 2010 02:12 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:07 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:02 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 01:10 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:56 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:44 spinesheath wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:40 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:31 Misrah wrote: [quote]
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
How does that not compute?
it does therefor not compute, because u:
a) only play competetive for 2 years b) are only C+/C c) u actually think ur better/more knowledgeable than u are
Fucking hell, just give up. You already said you don't play SC much, let alone competitively. Of course he'd know more than you about the game. Also C+ is a pretty high level, you don't need to be Jaedong to comment on the game.
Honestly Misrah I think you're just getting trolled right now
On February 26 2010 01:15 BlackYoshi wrote: However, from watching, I really think they need to add back in the 30% accuracy loss from shooting up hill. They say needing site is enough disadvantage, but when all you have to do is get 1-2 units up a ramp or just have a flying unit hover over it, it really negates any advantage from holding uphill terrain (which makes no sense in a military context)
Oh man, a military inaccuracy in starcraft? Alert blizzard, this was supposed to be the most realistic war game ever.
It was in Brood War and worked great; it made taking the high ground a great idea.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
On February 26 2010 02:12 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:07 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:02 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 01:10 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:56 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:44 spinesheath wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:40 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote: [quote]
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
How does that not compute?
it does therefor not compute, because u:
a) only play competetive for 2 years b) are only C+/C c) u actually think ur better/more knowledgeable than u are
Fucking hell, just give up. You already said you don't play SC much, let alone competitively. Of course he'd know more than you about the game. Also C+ is a pretty high level, you don't need to be Jaedong to comment on the game.
Honestly Misrah I think you're just getting trolled right now
when exactly did i say i know more about sc:bw than he does?
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
Brood War is the hardcore? Most of the people who still play BW are playing Big Game Hunter games, UMS, and other "casual" games. The ICCUP crowd is very small.
what about this crowd?
The people who watch Starcraft games are probably not hardcore players, and are not "PRO COMPETITIVE" gods. They watch because its entertaining to watch, just like any other sport
On February 26 2010 01:36 Misrah wrote: I will say it again ITT: new people to Starcraft jumping on to a competitve Starcraft site and trying to tell me that they have great ideas about how starcrAft should play. Yep all the probes drones and scvs reAding this really know where me / most of the tl community is coming from when we talk about micro macro and mechanical skill.
Most of you have no idea what you are talking about. Forming baseless opinions about what sc1 is like when you don't competitevly play it is a joke. What's worse is these same people are then comparing sc2 to sc1. How can you try and tell me with a straight face that sc2 is better if you have never played sc1 at a competative level? He'll most of you don't even have the beta.
Most of the people disagreeing with nazgul and the more senior tl membors are simply casual gamers that jump from one shiny new game to another. Pro tip- stop talking about things you do not understand.
This game has way to many flaws to fix at this point. Dustin Browder has no idea what made Sc1 great and neither do anyone else at Blizzard. They got lucky with Sc1 and are now cashing in on the reputation Sc1 gave them. Sc2 will be another War3. Alot of people will play it beacuse it's new and there is nothing else to play.
Maybe they should have spent all the time they wasted on AI and GUI improvments on some creative units instead. Waaaay to many generic boring c&c style units in Sc2.
On February 26 2010 02:45 Senx wrote: Thats sad to hear,I guess battle.net really must have fucked up the p2p system since Blizzcon where people said it was as responsive as SC1
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
On February 26 2010 02:12 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:07 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 02:02 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 01:10 Misrah wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:56 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote:
On February 26 2010 00:44 spinesheath wrote: [quote]
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
How does that not compute?
it does therefor not compute, because u:
a) only play competetive for 2 years b) are only C+/C c) u actually think ur better/more knowledgeable than u are
Fucking hell, just give up. You already said you don't play SC much, let alone competitively. Of course he'd know more than you about the game. Also C+ is a pretty high level, you don't need to be Jaedong to comment on the game.
Honestly Misrah I think you're just getting trolled right now
when exactly did i say i know more about sc:bw than he does?
seriously are u his 2nd account or what?
ur implying it but again, im not gonna feed the troll
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
Brood War is the hardcore? Most of the people who still play BW are playing Big Game Hunter games, UMS, and other "casual" games. The ICCUP crowd is very small.
what about this crowd?
The people who watch Starcraft games are probably not hardcore players, and are not "PRO COMPETITIVE" gods. They watch because its entertaining to watch, just like any other sport
And in just about any other sport that is really popular among spectators it is damn hard to achieve pro level. If it isn't hard, it doesn't seem to be so much fun to watch.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
Macro doesn't limit strategy. Harder macro just makes it harder to achieve both, which is where multitask and practice come in
What a junk thread full of low post count users bickering with each other ... SC2 has brought a lot of useless players into the TL community =(. Btw I agree with Naz, all the improvements are nice but if there is not enough cool/interesting micro to differentiate a player from a better player, then it becomes boring and not something I'd like to watch at the pro level.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
Macro doesn't limit strategy. Harder macro just makes it harder to achieve both, which is where multitask and practice come in
The ability to macro well made strategy less important. Oov is enough of an example where macro was simply became a deciding factor. Just went on from there to where its now almost completely extinct to see any kind of strategic play from any progamer, simply beacuse the core gameplay itself does not support creative play.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
I read through your posts, but I can't say I agree. The worry is that there won't be enough of a skill gap between different levels of players to make sc2 the competitive game many of us hope it will be. You point out that the absence of demanding micro/macro might make for a game which favors good decisions (and perhabs creativity?), but I don't see how this can be enough in a game where info is so easily avaiable through replays/streams/vods etc. A standard way of playing will develop, and even though it will change through innovative play again and again the majority of succeses will most likely stem from superior performances of already well-known strategies. The question remains whether performing these strategies is demanding enough to really sort the wheat from the chaff.
And while I do understand what you are getting at when you say that the "sc2 is easy" statement is a bit premature I don't agree with your use of "easy". You seem to think that the accumulated knowledge of sc1 makes it an easier game - but it only hightens the bar making the competition og the highest level even more demanding in absolut measures, and perhabs also in relative. A new rts, which is new to the whole field of players, might very well feel easy competitively since the oppositions is as untrained as you. "Easy" and "well understood"/"solved" are not synonyms.
And lastly, I don't believe it's true that sc players are worse off than any other rts players in sc2 beta if you factor in the total amount of players from the respective rts communities.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
It's impossible to create a game that's about strategy that people want to watch. All sports and games involve strategy but it's just one part of the game. The strategy can be pretty easy or very complicated. If it's easy observers can understand and enjoy it, but at the same time you need something more then strategy to make it interesting. You need speed and skill. If the strategy is very complicated(chess), no one wants to watch it because they can't understand the strategy and therfore cannot enjoy it.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Maybe morons who focus on post count should focus on arguments instead. I have been playing Sc since day one and also War2 and War1. You still have more posts then me, good for you!
I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
A divided army is generally a shitty army. The harass everywhere style was generally how zerg played. If toss or terran did it their armies would get raped. No1 knows exactly how each race is supposed to function yet but I guess you can make these multiple attack strats part of your experimentation. Its beta after all
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
First post here, Ill just give my view as a "casual" gamer.
First off, when I first heard of all these new macro mechanics, many thought it would lower the talent level. Well I to an extent disagree, I believe that also raised the celing. You cant tell me if Jaedong and I had 5 minutes to create as many zerglings as possible that Jaedong wont win that by a landslide. But Me being a long time BW player will be able to out macro a newer player that is trying it for the first time.
Now when it comes to micro I feel the same way. In BW progamers got the most out of their units, Usually they made it so the AI wasnt so bad, I just feel that with smarter AI will just come with harder micro. Also its only a week in, for all we know the fixes in balance will make micro work. We will figure out new micro techniques.
Basically With it being easier should create better players. Micro wont be the same probably ever. But new mechanics will come in. Also I havent read up so I might of missed something but yea.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid.
On February 26 2010 03:35 Chained wrote: First post here, Ill just give my view as a "casual" gamer.
First off, when I first heard of all these new macro mechanics, many thought it would lower the talent level. Well I to an extent disagree, I believe that also raised the celing. You cant tell me if Jaedong and I had 5 minutes to create as many zerglings as possible that Jaedong wont win that by a landslide. But Me being a long time BW player will be able to out macro a newer player that is trying it for the first time.
Now when it comes to micro I feel the same way. In BW progamers got the most out of their units, Usually they made it so the AI wasnt so bad, I just feel that with smarter AI will just come with harder micro. Also its only a week in, for all we know the fixes in balance will make micro work. We will figure out new micro techniques.
Basically With it being easier should create better players. Micro wont be the same probably ever. But new mechanics will come in. Also I havent read up so I might of missed something but yea.
Making macro easier raises the skill ceiling? That doesn't make sense
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
what the hell are you talking about?
I was just making a point that you don't understand what micro is. Attacking on many fronts at the same time is not micro.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
A divided army is generally a shitty army. The harass everywhere style was generally how zerg played. If toss or terran did it their armies would get raped. No1 knows exactly how each race is supposed to function yet but I guess you can make these multiple attack strats part of your experimentation. Its beta after all
I am just saying you can micro in different ways, just because zealots auto surround a unit does not make the game autofail. And I happen to think there are alot of units that dont really belong in the "main army pack" reapers, DTs, void rays in base raiding situations, Ghosts, Banshee, nydus worms, maybe even roaches to some extent, prism shuttle (forgot the name) warping units in the back of a base while you main is attacking a expo.
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
Macro doesn't limit strategy. Harder macro just makes it harder to achieve both, which is where multitask and practice come in
The ability to macro well made strategy less important. Oov is enough of an example where macro was simply became a deciding factor. Just went on from there to where its now almost completely extinct to see any kind of strategic play from any progamer, simply beacuse the core gameplay itself does not support creative play.
Oov revolutionized starcraft by bringing fast-expanding strategies to the forefront, not because he was able to spend his money better than other progamers.
His macro revolution was in fact a strategy revolution.
On February 25 2010 20:57 ret wrote: I really hate how in sc2, micro is almost non existant. Combined with the easy macro, you have a really dumb simple game right now that almost anyone can be good at. >.<
in fact, usually one gets punished if they try to micro. not to mention a+move seems to target buildings before units if both are in range...
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
We're not saying its an instant win but it makes it a hell of a lot easier than what it was in BW, which people view as a negative thing
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
what the hell are you talking about?
I was just making a point that you don't understand what micro is. Attacking on many fronts at the same time is not micro.
Yes it is! Macro = the art of making units, managing your base etc. Micro = the art of CONTROLLING YOUR UNITS. How is controlling three different units at different parts of the map not micro?
So your telling me that cloaking your ghost, getting it to the nuke site, nuking.. and then controlling your 2 dropships at a totally different place on the map and dropping the payload in a safe spot.. all while controlling your main army at a different place is not micro. Maybe this is the reason this thread has 16 pages? People define micro totally different. Im old school. To me Zileas was a MICRO player, he would micro his reavers around in a shuttle all while attacking with his main army elsewhere.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
We're not saying its an instant win but it makes it a hell of a lot easier than what it was in BW, which people view as a negative thing
It makes it easier for the casual gamer to come and learn the game and play acceptably well without getting frustrated 'cause their units are idiots. However, the "hardcore" gamers will still have to put in a ton of effort to ensure that their units are doing exactly what they want. All they've done is lower the initial skill gap, the skill ceiling is still going to be as high as ever.
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
what the hell are you talking about?
I was just making a point that you don't understand what micro is. Attacking on many fronts at the same time is not micro.
Yes it is! Macro = the art of making units, managing your base etc. Micro = the art of CONTROLLING YOUR UNITS. How is controlling three different units at different parts of the map not micro?
So your telling me that cloaking your ghost, getting it to the nuke site, nuking.. and then controlling your 2 dropships at a totally different place on the map and dropping the payload in a safe spot.. all while controlling your main army at a different place is not micro. Maybe this is the reason this thread has 16 pages? People define micro totally different. Im old school. To me Zileas was a MICRO player, he would micro his reavers around in a shuttle all while attacking with his main army elsewhere.
I'm old school too and you are still wrong. Zileas controlling his reaver and shuttle is micro, but all the other stuff you are talking about is multitasking.
I've kept checking the site links but they're still down. Any idea when the site might be up again? You will still get a lot of site hits even if you post the interviews here.
Warcraft 3 is completely different from starcraft. The game revolves around heroes, smaller army, items, not to mention different economy management (upkeep). To say that WC3 never became as popular as SC because of better AI is silly. Also there is no micro in WC3? I'm not even bother commenting on that.
hey, if the site being down is frustrating for you guys, imagine how frustrating it is for me. i'm paying for the thing. until the hosting company calls me back, no one is seeing the interviews. sorry.
i'll let you all know the second it's up, i promise.
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
I've read other threads that have addressed this issue, and halfway through this one without hearing anyone approach the actual (fairly obvious, actually )solution to this problem:
The solution is not "completely inert AI requiring clickfest babysitting" VS "super intelligent AI requiring no player input"
The solution is:
"competent AI with intelligent pathfinding, that is augmented by special moves for each unit"
Analogy:
What separated the kick ass player from the average guy in Mortal Combat?
Answer:
Special Moves:
Each fighting charachter had a basic sequence of moves that it could do simply. If you pressed one, maybe two buttons fast enough you could kick straight, or punch straight.
If you added more buttons to a sequence you could do more sophisticated moves: roundhouse kicks, and uppercuts. Some of these were only effective if you had your avatar in the right position vs your opponents.
However, the uber Special Moves were the Fatalities:
If you knew the moves and could execute them fast enough in the right sequence, 4 or 5 button presses would do those wicked cool Fatalities that made everyone laugh .. they totally kicked ass.
This is what Starcraft needs for every unit.
The answer is to add special micro abilities to every unit, and make them precise enough to be difficult to pull off with consistency in the heat of strategizing, macroing and battle.
It's things like using the Patrol button to force a retreating Vulture to fire at pursuing zerglings on the move. It involves tweaking the "auto surround" to only take effect when say ... you have a group of zerglings selected, then right clicking on a target, then immediately right clicking twice *behind* the target to activate the surround.
In this way you satisfy all parties, the casual gamers (mass sales) that Blizz needs to profit ...and the truly skilled players that will elevate the game from a casual hobby to an art.
Peeps need to step outside the "either / or" box that they are trapped in in order to see this /obvious
Man this thread really became a shit-storm. I feel like I'm back in the great MBS flame-fests of 2008.
Anyways 2 misunderstandings have got to stop. 1.) Assuming that hardcore BW fans yearn for an interface even more arbitrarily limited than that of WC2. This is totally unjustified. Stop it. 2.) Assuming that hardcore BW fans want SC2 to be similar to BW in as many respects as possible. This is totally unjustified. Stop it. At the very least attempt to tenably connect what BW fans assert with what they supposedly believe or desire.
That said I can't wait to actually see these interviews.
Blizzard was going somewhere when they added abilities like blink. Another good example is the viking. As of right now, you do not see the infestor come into play. Its pretty much the same case with Templars and Ravens. Fixing the spellcasters will DRASTICALLY improve how well it plays. You dont need dumb AI, that shouldnt be an issue. You just need interesting units. Reminds me of the if it hits like a truck, it needs to be a glass cannon and vice versa thread. We have that sort of in SC2, its just not exagerated enough. If you catch hydras from behind a wall of roaches, you should tear them to peices and win that fight.
On February 26 2010 04:09 cuteFayth wrote: I use ravens TvZ I think seeker missile kicks ass, I think spellcasters are good so far... dunno about infestors, I'm guessing they replace defilers?
The only imba spellcaster is the motherfucking mothership
The best use for a raven I've seen so far is to snipe those pesky medivacs and to keep detection with your army. Otherwise thats money you could be using on having a bigger army <.<.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
We're not saying its an instant win but it makes it a hell of a lot easier than what it was in BW, which people view as a negative thing
It makes it easier for the casual gamer to come and learn the game and play acceptably well without getting frustrated 'cause their units are idiots. However, the "hardcore" gamers will still have to put in a ton of effort to ensure that their units are doing exactly what they want. All they've done is lower the initial skill gap, the skill ceiling is still going to be as high as ever.
You just don't get it, do you. Hardcore gamers will have to put in much LESS effort to ensure units are doing what they want. And making the game easier will only lower the initial skill gap? No. It'll lower the peak skill level. Again, you'd have to be stupid not to understand this. If you haven't gotten it at this point then I really don't know what to say.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
We're not saying its an instant win but it makes it a hell of a lot easier than what it was in BW, which people view as a negative thing
It makes it easier for the casual gamer to come and learn the game and play acceptably well without getting frustrated 'cause their units are idiots. However, the "hardcore" gamers will still have to put in a ton of effort to ensure that their units are doing exactly what they want. All they've done is lower the initial skill gap, the skill ceiling is still going to be as high as ever.
You just don't get it, do you. Hardcore gamers will have to put in much LESS effort to ensure units are doing what they want. And making the game easier will only lower the initial skill gap? No. It'll lower the peak skill level. Again, you'd have to be stupid not to understand this. If you haven't gotten it at this point then I really don't know what to say.
I understand that there's slightly less for the hardcore gamers to do. However, you're making it sound like everyone and their grandmothers will become the next Bonjwa of Starcraft 2 which will never be the case. The people who become the top progamers will be the people who practice constantly, put in a ton of dedication and learn all the tricks of the game.
I am with Chill here. I think it's completely unrealistic to expect BW-level micro and tactics out of SC2 that has been out for about a week in its beta form. It took years for BW to get to the level it's at. During the first week, people were likely just a-moving as well. Heck, since there had been no previous SC game to teach them the basics, they were likely playing even more retarded than SC2 players do now. It is hard to say whether SC2 will match BW-level quality and complexity, but it's pretty certain that it will have far more micro and tactics that people can possible imagine at this stage.
EDIT: since such things matter on this site, I'll add that I have played SC since the day it came out in 1998 and have made it to B on iccup as a qualifier.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid
Oh I agree the macro aspect wasn't there and that the game itself is nothing compared to Starcraft. All I'm saying is that just because units are a bit smarter doesn't mean micro is non-existent as WC3 itself was 99% micro even with all of its unit AI.
We're not saying its an instant win but it makes it a hell of a lot easier than what it was in BW, which people view as a negative thing
It makes it easier for the casual gamer to come and learn the game and play acceptably well without getting frustrated 'cause their units are idiots. However, the "hardcore" gamers will still have to put in a ton of effort to ensure that their units are doing exactly what they want. All they've done is lower the initial skill gap, the skill ceiling is still going to be as high as ever.
You just don't get it, do you. Hardcore gamers will have to put in much LESS effort to ensure units are doing what they want. And making the game easier will only lower the initial skill gap? No. It'll lower the peak skill level. Again, you'd have to be stupid not to understand this. If you haven't gotten it at this point then I really don't know what to say.
I understand that there's slightly less for the hardcore gamers to do. However, you're making it sound like everyone and their grandmothers will become the next Bonjwa of Starcraft 2 which will never be the case. The people who become the top progamers will be the people who practice constantly, put in a ton of dedication and learn all the tricks of the game.
Again stop hyperbolizing my argument cause it just makes yours look stupid. The point is heavily improved AI and MBS make it TOO easy, lowering the skill ceiling and catering too much to the newbs. Yes theres dedication required but not as much as there needs to be to make this as competitive and a true esports.
Maybe if you stopped exaggerating what I said you'd realize the argument
It's definitely way to early to tell. I just wonder if there are enough wrinkles/quirks with units, buildings, and maps to allow some of the cool strategies we see today. I fear that blizzard, in the quest for presenting a consistent product, will have sterilized the game too much.
On February 26 2010 03:55 choboPEon wrote: hey, if the site being down is frustrating for you guys, imagine how frustrating it is for me. i'm paying for the thing. until the hosting company calls me back, no one is seeing the interviews. sorry.
i'll let you all know the second it's up, i promise.
Yea that's gotta suck. Any chance of additional interviews with other people like Blizz people or other SC pros? (I'd love to see an interview of what Dustin Browder, David Kim, Nony, Ret, or the rest of them think on the state of the game now that it's been out for a little over a week.)
ive a nice fiber optic connection here in southern california and I too get pretty god awful delay, every single game on bnet 2.0 i normally get great pings to other servers, I don't understand why HoN matches can have such insanely quick response times even if your ping says like 200, with 10 players in the game, but in SC2 bnet 2.0, with only 1v1 or 1 vs computer, there's always delay.
it's nearly as bad as the delay in every SC1 Bnet game (without lan latency)
and i'm 99.9% sure it's not my PC hardware or hardware configuration.
On February 25 2010 23:05 bendez wrote: Again, there is no "auto-surround" feature. Units know the most effective route to reach an enemy unit, and as a result, they surround the unit. You yourself said that you want units to know the shortest distance possible. In SC2, they did just that.
Bendez glad that you heard about sc2- and came running over to this site to come and enjoy the beta. However-
After reading through this entire thread I have come to the conclusion that you and many other 'new' members to the community are going to be frustrated with TL. the reason is simply this: You are a noobie to starcraft. I have seen so many players here not understand why starcraft is such a great game, and why so many people here on TL are very worried with the current state of the game. New members of our community need to try and understand that most people hear have played SC for years, and in the case of nazgul for decades. Please do not come into the community with assumed opinions about how an RTS should play. For the members of the community that have been playing starcraft for some time, they know far better than most what map control and unit positioning should play like.
I am sorry but right now SC2 is a joke. Mechanically the game is not demanding, and you are completely incorrect to some how think that SC2 can be compared to SC1. SC2 is filled with easy buttons as far as i am concerned. There is no more micro, and macro is a one key press now. Any long term player of SC would not argue with me if I were to say that SC2 is:
- Has limited micro capability - Is not mechanically demanding - Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed - Has poor excuses for APM sinks - Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other. - That Blizzard has made SC2 more casual (and has even been quoted as saying that they would like their mothers to be able to pick up and play the game) - We realize that the game will be more profitable if it is easy, so new players like yourself can easily and quickly start winning. However our community has a problem with this train of thought, because we had hoped that SC2 > SC1 however as every day passes that dream is slowly fading away.
In short- SC2 is the super smash brothers brawl of SC1. (whereas SC1 is melee.) As a competitive melee player myself, brawl was a huge disappointment- and i fear that SC2 will be the same.
- Does not have the depth that SC enjoyed
How the fuck can you make such a claim, this is beyond retarded at so many levels.
- Has poor excuses for APM sinks clicking your workers to gather minerals wasent a stupid apm sink?
- Big battles are simply 1a2a3a, where any types of in battle decisions are negligible. Everything dies to quickly, or is too closely packed together- that your typical late game attacks are basically two blobs just attacking each other.
...this is also a sad excuse, you could of made the same argument when sc came out.
Also Ive played sc competitively for 3 years and lurked the forums for like 2 so im a Broodwar fanatic but you clearly have no idea how compitive games r made with such assumptions
same here, im dying to read those interviews but i just c'ant, the more i see this SC2 beta grow the whorst i feel about the game, my hopes were so high for this game, no doubt this is gonna be a terrific game for everyone to enjoy, then again most of the terrific games i have are well stored in a box while my SC is still running daily after 10 years, something is very special about starcraft and frankly ive played and watched sc2 more then someone should in the last few days and i feel whorst everyday... i pray for them to take the right direction with this game, hopefully a year or 2 after its official release, when the "casual/general" public will all have made blizzard very rich and all, they can go for PLAN B, patch the game up and switch it for us real starcraft hardcore fanatics that dont care about another RTS wih a starcraft title, we want Starcraft for what it is, a real bitch to handle!!! im certainly gonna buy it .. i bet blizzard knows that already, like a hardcore SC fan could pass on it even if they tryed...
SC:BW players bitching about improved unit AI and pathing. Could have seen this coming. Sorry not everyone else played SC1 long enough to overcome the dated Unit AI/Pathing/Interface. SC2 is a modern RTS, get your heads out of your own asses.
The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
On February 26 2010 08:03 fnaticAugury wrote: The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
On February 26 2010 08:03 fnaticAugury wrote: The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
You are totaly right, i just had nothing better to do at this very moment, im still very confident that itll all add up sooner or later.. Thumbs up
On February 25 2010 22:45 viletomato wrote: I see it as simply...
Easier Gameplay (Auto surround) ---> Caters to casual gamer 'Harder' Gameplay (No Auto surround) ---> Caters to the hardcore crowd
Casual gamer numbers > Hardcore gamer numbers So here is the contradiction that Blizzard faces... how can you cater to the hardcore and casual at the same time? You can't. You have to choose one or the other. UNLESS there is an option in game to switch autosurround on and off. But then you have a non-unified game and you have a divided community. I don't think that is something that Blizzard will implement.
At this time many people will say, since Blizzard wants to cater to the majority and make more $$ for the business they will cater to the casual gamer. To this I respond:
The popularity amongst hardcore gamers gives rise to the incentive that the casual gamers want to play the game and become hardcore. For example, some guy knowing nothing about sc sees jaedong on TV in korea and picks up the game because of the hardcore following. So I think catering to the Hardcore is very very important in attracting casual players to play the game. Think about how many noobs have watched pro korean players on youtube and picked up starcraft in the last 10 years. If there wasn't a pro following at all (based on crappy gameplay) you think any casual gamer would want to play the game past 2002ish? Heck no, it'll be forgotten just like all the other games that never stood the test of time.
So my thoughts are:
Catering to the Casual ---> Ensures an initial boom of players, Big bucks for the first 3-4 years and then a dying fanbase and $$ trails off. Catering to the Hardcore ---> Ensures the longevity of the game. Lets just assume initially not as many players will play comparing to catering to the casual, but will generate cash for blizz in form of TV and tournaments over the next 10 years. $$ comes in for a long amount of time.
I really think option 2 is the better choice.... no casual gamer is not going to play SC2 just because there is no autosurround... they don't follow it, they don't even know what it is.
I'm sure blizzard has thought about all these things, and have stuck with their decision.
BW falls into the harcore category and last time I checked its probably the most successful RTS ever made.
S Of course you can cater to both hardcore and casual. You have to favor one slightly, but theres no reason that the 2 extremes are the only option. For example: Pathfinding improvement :Obviously ok, even for hardcore fans Multiple unit selection: fine, more appeasement for casual people but still viable. Auto surround: Now its ridiculous. Theres no reason casual gamers will stray away from the game because they don't have an AI doing all the micro themselves. Take improved battle AI away and you've appeased both sides. Easier to manage units, but microing skill is still there.
One of the suggestions offered by a lot of ppl (and even some on teamliquid) was improve the macro mechanic even more by being able to press a button like alt and then a hotkey for a unit and have all gateways produce that unit. Does this not seem ridiculous? If you appease the casual crowd this much then the game just became your standard above average RTS. Nothing special, and certainly nothing that will attract pro gaming. I swear if they add this feature I'm never gonna play SC2 X_X.
The point is Blizzard needs to find some middle ground because right now everythings just way too easy. I think the stance blizzard chooses needs to cater more to the hardcore gaming side because this is the sequel to SC1...you still need to remain true to its roots.
Also is the server still not working for any1 else???
Brood War is the hardcore? Most of the people who still play BW are playing Big Game Hunter games, UMS, and other "casual" games. The ICCUP crowd is very small.
what about this crowd?
The people who watch Starcraft games are probably not hardcore players, and are not "PRO COMPETITIVE" gods. They watch because its entertaining to watch, just like any other sport
And in just about any other sport that is really popular among spectators it is damn hard to achieve pro level. If it isn't hard, it doesn't seem to be so much fun to watch.
If you think it will be easy to achieve "pro level" , you need to work on your analysis skills. Its one week of beta. The game will change significantly between now and release, and between release and expansions and patches. Its impossible to draw any conclusions at this point.
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy". I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
It's impossible to create a game that's about strategy that people want to watch. All sports and games involve strategy but it's just one part of the game. The strategy can be pretty easy or very complicated. If it's easy observers can understand and enjoy it, but at the same time you need something more then strategy to make it interesting. You need speed and skill. If the strategy is very complicated(chess), no one wants to watch it because they can't understand the strategy and therfore cannot enjoy it.
Football strategy is incredibly complicated and is the most watched sport in America, mostly by people who actually understand only basic amounts of the strategy employed.
I'm certain that this is true of Korean spectators. They may realize why something is good against what, what the advantages are, whats a good move and whats a bad move, but the random spectator probably won't be able to tell you specific resource timings, exact push timings, etc, but that doesn't mean it can't be entertaining.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
So make the game more frustrating to the average player. Got it.
Absolutely no one likes it when your units do you something you didn't tell them to and then you have to babysit them.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
If it was up to you guys every unit would have to be directly managed completely. Even the probes mining, if you don't right click to tell them to mine EVERY SINGLE TIME then the skill celing's too low and every noob can become a progamer.
Have you ever played WC3? The unit AI in that was pretty damn good, about as good as SC2, yet not everyone became a "progamer" because there's more to playing then just "LOL AUTO-SURROUND I WIN"
Theres a reason it never became anything close to BW too. Not as challenging (the macro aspect just isnt there).
Also no1 is complaining about probes mining so stop hyperbolizing cause it just makes your argument look stupid.
On February 26 2010 03:35 Chained wrote: First post here, Ill just give my view as a "casual" gamer.
First off, when I first heard of all these new macro mechanics, many thought it would lower the talent level. Well I to an extent disagree, I believe that also raised the celing. You cant tell me if Jaedong and I had 5 minutes to create as many zerglings as possible that Jaedong wont win that by a landslide. But Me being a long time BW player will be able to out macro a newer player that is trying it for the first time.
Now when it comes to micro I feel the same way. In BW progamers got the most out of their units, Usually they made it so the AI wasnt so bad, I just feel that with smarter AI will just come with harder micro. Also its only a week in, for all we know the fixes in balance will make micro work. We will figure out new micro techniques.
Basically With it being easier should create better players. Micro wont be the same probably ever. But new mechanics will come in. Also I havent read up so I might of missed something but yea.
Making macro easier raises the skill ceiling? That doesn't make sense
WC3 had a growing pro scene in Korea, but a map fixing scandal pretty much destroyed any credibility and made WC3 look like pro wrestling.
On February 26 2010 03:22 Tiamat wrote: I am sure this will never be replied to, but micro can also be VERY different that what you guys are bitching about.
I have yet seen a reply where a player has attacked 3 or more places at once on the map at the same time. Hell most of the time its rare to see a player attack 2 places at a time. All to common is one army vs another. I believe to be successful in SC2 you will need to take advantage of all the mobility the races have and attack at multiple places at the same time.
A few examples..
T - 2 dropships full of rines in the main, main army at the front door expo and meanwhile a pair of ghosts nuking another expo.
Z - Muta harass on the front lines, while a nydus pops up in the rear.
There is your true skills in this game.
Yes it can be so different that it's no longer micro.
what the hell are you talking about?
I was just making a point that you don't understand what micro is. Attacking on many fronts at the same time is not micro.
Yes it is! Macro = the art of making units, managing your base etc. Micro = the art of CONTROLLING YOUR UNITS. How is controlling three different units at different parts of the map not micro?
So your telling me that cloaking your ghost, getting it to the nuke site, nuking.. and then controlling your 2 dropships at a totally different place on the map and dropping the payload in a safe spot.. all while controlling your main army at a different place is not micro. Maybe this is the reason this thread has 16 pages? People define micro totally different. Im old school. To me Zileas was a MICRO player, he would micro his reavers around in a shuttle all while attacking with his main army elsewhere.
I'm old school too and you are still wrong. Zileas controlling his reaver and shuttle is micro, but all the other stuff you are talking about is multitasking.
When you multitask 3 separate groups of units....thats micromanaging them.
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
I've read other threads that have addressed this issue, and halfway through this one without hearing anyone approach the actual (fairly obvious, actually )solution to this problem:
The solution is not "completely inert AI requiring clickfest babysitting" VS "super intelligent AI requiring no player input"
The solution is:
"competent AI with intelligent pathfinding, that is augmented by special moves for each unit"
Analogy:
What separated the kick ass player from the average guy in Mortal Combat?
Answer:
Special Moves:
Each fighting charachter had a basic sequence of moves that it could do simply. If you pressed one, maybe two buttons fast enough you could kick straight, or punch straight.
If you added more buttons to a sequence you could do more sophisticated moves: roundhouse kicks, and uppercuts. Some of these were only effective if you had your avatar in the right position vs your opponents.
However, the uber Special Moves were the Fatalities:
If you knew the moves and could execute them fast enough in the right sequence, 4 or 5 button presses would do those wicked cool Fatalities that made everyone laugh .. they totally kicked ass.
This is what Starcraft needs for every unit.
The answer is to add special micro abilities to every unit, and make them precise enough to be difficult to pull off with consistency in the heat of strategizing, macroing and battle.
It's things like using the Patrol button to force a retreating Vulture to fire at pursuing zerglings on the move. It involves tweaking the "auto surround" to only take effect when say ... you have a group of zerglings selected, then right clicking on a target, then immediately right clicking twice *behind* the target to activate the surround.
In this way you satisfy all parties, the casual gamers (mass sales) that Blizz needs to profit ...and the truly skilled players that will elevate the game from a casual hobby to an art.
Peeps need to step outside the "either / or" box that they are trapped in in order to see this /obvious
.
So basically make every unit a spellcaster
This is close to what WC3 did, and we see how well-loved that game is on here.
On February 26 2010 04:00 EchOne wrote: Man this thread really became a shit-storm. I feel like I'm back in the great MBS flame-fests of 2008.
Anyways 2 misunderstandings have got to stop. 1.) Assuming that hardcore BW fans yearn for an interface even more arbitrarily limited than that of WC2. This is totally unjustified. Stop it. 2.) Assuming that hardcore BW fans want SC2 to be similar to BW in as many respects as possible. This is totally unjustified. Stop it. At the very least attempt to tenably connect what BW fans assert with what they supposedly believe or desire.
That said I can't wait to actually see these interviews.
Then assert what you want. This thread has mostly been saying "the AI is too smart", so naturally, it sounds like what you want is for the AI to become stupider.
On February 26 2010 08:03 fnaticAugury wrote: The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
You clowns need to understand that sc has more strategy than your tiny brains can comprehend. Just because you see tanks/vultures every time in tvp doesn't mean its the same thing every time. What do you call strategy? making different units every game? LOL
I bet if i asked you what jaedongs strategy in a certain game was you would say " he just went zergling muta and microed a bunch" which is the most simplistic way to think about a game. Bgh noobs don't have any idea what strategy is. You're so bad and ignorant it really hurts. Removing micro/macro doesn't add strategy to the game, L2P.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
<a name="cmd06"></a><font style='font:bold 12pt Arial'>6. THOU SHALL RESPECT FORUM VETERANS</font> <blockquote>All other things being equal, we will give preferential treatment to site members who have been with us longer (as reflected in their post count + length of time with us as a registered member). It's a simple recognition of the quality of these people. Longevity and contribution are prized commodities around here. In a similar vein, "known" pro/semi-pro players will also be treated with deference (yes, quite a few hang out here). Don't complain - these guys have earned it.
Remember: we ban little kids all the time because they sign on thinking they can say and do whatever they want to whomever they want right from the get-go - just like they're used to doing at other sites. That attitude won't work here. That's a promise. As far as new users are concerned (i.e. anyone with less than 1000 or so quality posts to their name), this site is Holy Ground. The veterans are the users who've consistently shown respect to the site and to others and that's why they're still here. Show them some respect.
In practice, this policy means a user who has thousands of posts may be able to get away with a few minor transgressions in etiquette with just a warning. If you're at 50 posts and you try the same kind of stunt, then we may just ban you. Harsh? Yes. Unfair? Most definitely. But that's the way life is. Learn to live with it.
This also means you should think twice before calling that guy with 5000+ posts a jackass. If the guy's been with us that long, chances are YOU'RE the one being an idiot. Some battles are just not worth fighting - just move on.</blockquote><div align='center'><img src='/images/misc/tencommandments.gif'></div>
[
Wasn't going to get into this but this post put me over the edge. to all the guys with >100 posts read that spoiler and stop complaining. As for the game, I posted it earlier and I'll post it now--the game will be different. Way back we had the choice of choosing if we wanted SC2, a whole new game. WoS, "World of Starcraft". Or HUGE scbw expansion set (ie the same game except "new" due to ridiculous amounts of changes).
The community chose a whole new game and that's what we got. If you have not played SCII Beta, you have no merit for any argument about imbalance, lower skill, etc. If you HAVE played the Beta, then you have a little room for complaint. I personally believe that sc2 will be different but still a high-skill game. I have played the beta and I find that a lot of the same principles still apply.
Also, remember this is a BETA! if people have serious complaints, send it to blizzard and stop filling the forum with crappy arguments. We're a week in and we're already making snap judgements when the final units/technologies/etc aren't even established! SCBW was imbalanced as crap and filled with tons of holes when it first came out. Not when it first hit beta, when it first came out. It took 10+ years to get scbw to the level it is at today and it will take a long time before anyone really knows if SC2 will live up to its prequel. Until then just chill out, enjoy the ride and especially if you do not have a beta key don't make snap judgements
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
So make the game more frustrating to the average player. Got it.
Absolutely no one likes it when your units do you something you didn't tell them to and then you have to babysit them.
I'm pretty sure that's what people are complaining about now. Too smart of an AI means units will take initiatives the player hasn't asked for.
On February 26 2010 08:27 BlackYoshi wrote: When you multitask 3 separate groups of units....thats micromanaging them.
How much simpler of a definition do you want?
When you multitask 3 separate groups of units... that's multitasking them. Microing consists of the specific things you ask those units to do.
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
I've read other threads that have addressed this issue, and halfway through this one without hearing anyone approach the actual (fairly obvious, actually )solution to this problem:
The solution is not "completely inert AI requiring clickfest babysitting" VS "super intelligent AI requiring no player input"
The solution is:
"competent AI with intelligent pathfinding, that is augmented by special moves for each unit"
Analogy:
What separated the kick ass player from the average guy in Mortal Combat?
Answer:
Special Moves:
Each fighting charachter had a basic sequence of moves that it could do simply. If you pressed one, maybe two buttons fast enough you could kick straight, or punch straight.
If you added more buttons to a sequence you could do more sophisticated moves: roundhouse kicks, and uppercuts. Some of these were only effective if you had your avatar in the right position vs your opponents.
However, the uber Special Moves were the Fatalities:
If you knew the moves and could execute them fast enough in the right sequence, 4 or 5 button presses would do those wicked cool Fatalities that made everyone laugh .. they totally kicked ass.
This is what Starcraft needs for every unit.
The answer is to add special micro abilities to every unit, and make them precise enough to be difficult to pull off with consistency in the heat of strategizing, macroing and battle.
It's things like using the Patrol button to force a retreating Vulture to fire at pursuing zerglings on the move. It involves tweaking the "auto surround" to only take effect when say ... you have a group of zerglings selected, then right clicking on a target, then immediately right clicking twice *behind* the target to activate the surround.
In this way you satisfy all parties, the casual gamers (mass sales) that Blizz needs to profit ...and the truly skilled players that will elevate the game from a casual hobby to an art.
Peeps need to step outside the "either / or" box that they are trapped in in order to see this /obvious
.
So basically make every unit a spellcaster
This is close to what WC3 did, and we see how well-loved that game is on here.
No, it isn't basically what WC3 did. Its far closer to what RA3 did, but RA3 didn't really design all of their units properly.
On February 26 2010 08:36 Audiohelper123 wrote: You clowns need to understand that sc has more strategy than your tiny brains can comprehend. Just because you see tanks/vultures every time in tvp doesn't mean its the same thing every time. What do you call strategy? making different units every game? LOL
I bet if i asked you what jaedongs strategy in a certain game was you would say " he just went zergling muta and microed a bunch" which is the most simplistic way to think about a game. Bgh noobs don't have any idea what strategy is. You're so bad and ignorant it really hurts. Removing micro/macro doesn't add strategy to the game, L2P.
You are literally the worst poster in this thread.
Anyway...
The solution to many posters' complaints in this thread (re: 'auto surround') is unlikely to be simple. I have NO fucking idea how blizzard code their AI (and neither will 99% of the people on this website, so if you want to attack my post on that basis then this entire thread's discussion is moot) but I dare say that auto surround is intrinsically linked to the improved pathing. There is an intuitive validity to the assumption that units moving to a position or moving to attack another unit/building will use the same form of AI to avoid obstructing objects and complete their objective (ie. move there or attack this), whether these obstructing objects be friendly units or opposing units or map terrain features or random doodads. Thus creating the auto surround.
The question is this: If the above assumption is correct, and I have already conceded that this is speculation about blizzard's code, is it possible for blizzard to easily (or at all) unlink the AI pathing improvements when the specific unit is being used with attack move, or automatically engaging a threat? If it is possible this would leave out the idiocy of a dragoon getting stuck at a ramp/building for 20 seconds when not 'in combat' (so to speak), whilst requiring the same level of 'input' that it currently does in BW when engaging the enemy to obtain optimal output.
The secondary question is whether that is even desirable...
As an aside, I have to say, I echo the sentiment that it is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early for people to be complaining about the simplicity or automation of combat in SC2 when the Beta is a week old and SC is 11 years old... Muta micro, vulture patrolling, 'pylon AI' (ie. use of pylons in PvX at the P's base to distract fire from range units), the 'magic box' and so on are all 'tricks' that, yes, have added value to the game, but took YEARS to ever be discovered, and indeed were largely discovered by accident. Let's not forget that the game was intensely popular before and without these things. Hardcore War2 players bitched and moaned about simplification of a number of things also which were imminently forgotten by the SC community.
Edit: When I say complaining about the simplicity or automation, I mean complaining as if it is the death knell of SC2. I don't mean giving simple feedback for beta purposes.
From what I've seen, all of this so called dumbing down would really do is be less forgiving for players to who make mistake to depend on their micro skill the compensate for it. Skill wise, I don't see it really lower the competition all that much. The best out there will still be the best out there, all I really see if that the meta shift a bit away from micro and macro aspect and a bit toward strategic and timing. So instead of being too concern about how Starcraft 2 require less micro, what we should really be more concern about it the balance of all the units so that no one build is clearly superior to the rest.
On February 26 2010 08:03 fnaticAugury wrote: The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
beta = feedback.
Otherwise there would be no beta duh.
But bad feedback could damage it for everyone
lol, so beta should only be for good feedback?
funny how many replies the thread has even though most of us cant even read the interviews
I agree completely with Misrah.. you have a bunch of people that hear about SC2 and TL on IGN or Blizzard's forum and suddenly because they're "gamers" think that they have in depth knowledge on SCBW and can comment on it when really they don't give a shit about the original game at all. OK you played BGH 5 years ago on west and had fun, that doesn't make you even qualified to talk about why BW is a good game.
You have Black Yoshi who keeps talking about how small the competitive BW scene is when it has nothing to do with how the game should end up. And then he goes off about how it's a strategy game and therefore shouldn't be something you really have to spend time on and practice at + Show Spoiler +
On February 26 2010 01:41 SubtleArt wrote:Much improved AI is the complaint about micro, yes. Also no1s saying the game sucks, just that the improvements make it too easy to micro, (and thus do not deem SC an esport), and ultimately too easy to have the same competitive atmosphere as BW
How do we know this already though (the beta has been out a week...)? It may well be easier to play at a reasonably competitive level but there are still going to be ways for the top players to distance themselves from the crowd.
they can not distance themselves when a game is so easy to play. I mean MBS and automine coupled with improved ai means that everyone will be playing perfect Starcraft with like 150apm lol
Good; its a strategy game, the defining thing should be tactics and strategy, not how much you can practice (which pushed out the old Korean pros) and burns out all the current pros. They practice 8-12 hours a day, and many retire in the mid 20s. Its just not good for the "strategy".
. Sounds like a typical noob to me, mad that you have to focus on something you don't want to (execution) up even though you have a great "strategy." Yeah I'm sure you'll be gosu at SC2 also :/. Then he goes on to back up his opinion of koreans opinions with statistics concerning audience size and television ratings here.. .
On February 26 2010 03:02 BlackYoshi wrote: I think most Koreans will agree that Starcraft was more exciting in the days of Oov, Nal Ra, Boxer, and such when the game was more dynamic, less set-in stone, and unorthodox strategies could work on surprise factor alone, and the television ratings and crowds back that up.
EXCEPT he has no idea what he's talking about an is just spewing his opinion like fact. Whenever television ratings for OSL and MSL finals are released they are always the number one watched shows 18-21 korean male, the most recent OSL had a huge crowd.. I don't know what to say. Keep imagining that you know the statistics though.
So many delusional posters in this thread talking about "there wont be melee unit micro, but now you'll have enough APM to do a simultaneous front attack and back attack with a drop!"... :/. Then you can just a move the two groups together! Woot.
I don't expect SC2 to change much from the beta so you guys will probably get what you want regardless. Just disappointing from Blizzard imo
The micro in Wc3 was a lot different in the beginning of the game than it was at the end. I really think everyone needs to give the game a few months. There aren't very many talented players playing ATM anyways.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
Still wondering how you can possibly argue with me about staracraft when you don't play the game lol logically you have no platform with which to argue from. you have zero experience and zero data to back up your claims. You just talk too much.
On February 26 2010 00:29 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote: [quote]
u certainly have a point. but ur wrong too.
u say sc2 is easier then sc1 and it is not as demanding and so on
perhaps ur right and it is a little easier in general but fact is that 80% of the sc1 progamers ive seen playing so far just plain suck at sc2. I stopped reading here. and i couldnt believe it when i first saw it.
ret for example one of the best foreigner players in sc1, he even went to korea to train there, plays sc2 like a total nooby
fact is learning sc:bw and becoming good at it is nothing compared to mastering a new game. atm sc2 is not easier to play than sc.
it might be in 10years, namely when there is as much "data" as there is about sc:bw.
what happens is a shift of the skills required.
u can no longer read all guides, hammer them into ur head like a machine, get required apm and fkn pwn. too many sc players think they are the gods of RTS gamers. infact nobody knows more about their game as sc players do but that is only natural cause sc is the game that has been around the longest.
players from all other RTS games currently play on an equal or even higher lvl then the sc players. do u know why?
because most sc players have forgotten what an RTS is all about.
its not only about APM, macro, micro. only SC is it in his current state because the stategical part has evolved over the years to a point where there is not much that will change. and that is why many sc players fkn suck at sc2 until they remember how to use their head again.
when i see a terra whine about stealthed units because he has no detection and on the other hand he is proud how he didnt miss a single mule dropdown, i can do nothing expect to shake my head in disbelieve. GJ u macroed perfectly but how about using ur head and fkn scan instead of getting +270 minerals and lose to invis units???
if u want macro, micro and apm go on continue to play SC u might be right that it is more demanding in that particular part but stop posting shit like sc2 is easier then sc it rly annoys the hell out of me
ps: frustration of not having a beta key yet may have caused generel aggresive tone in my speech and is not to be taken personaly
Not wasting me time.
u are so proving on of my points...
its a fact dude just get over it. i didnt say it might not change with the time.
but watch a replay of ret, kolll etc and if u say: "wow he did play good", i allow u to call my post "time wasting"
It's no fact (it's blatantly wrong), and he didn't prove any of your points.
yes i get it, u play sc and u have been a tl member longer than i have. ur oppinion is right, mine is wrong. don't waste ur time reading my posts i have no clue.
u are the gods of RTS and ur idols are gosu no matter what they do, they can even please 10 woman at the same time.
Glad you are starting to understand. I don't care what you have to say because you do not understand sc. Then you make baseless opinions about me And tl when you probably just found this site today. Yes I am 100 percent serious.
the thing is ur jumping to conlusions. u say i dont understand sc which is totaly not true. i didnt stumble across this site yesterday. i just didnt bother posting/registering because i didnt play sc much myself. i however followed the sc pro scene, watched vods, read strategic guides and so on for at least 5 years.
on the other hand i have nearly 10 years of experience in playing RTS games competetive, be it sc (as mentioned not much), wc3, dow1/2, c&n series, btfm the list goes on.
u sir are just a sad because u judge people without knowing them. i don't know u too, but did i ignore ur posts or opinion? no, i read them and said i think u are wrong.
perhaps the way i did so wasn't the nicest but sure its better then what u are doing.
so get off ur horse.
so you have zero sc experience and you admit it. Also no other rts does not make you an expert. Sc is not an rts. It is the best. It is art. It has a pro league for 10 plus years. Nothing else compares.
i don't have zero sc experience. also playing only sc doesnt make u an expert. and i am curious on what level u play starcraft. so care to tell me?
I am a C+/C level zerg on Icup. My record currently is C at 30-12 on the ladder. I have been playing starcarft for 12 years, competitive for 2. and yes, playing SC makes me far more knowledgeable than you when it comes to discussing SC1 and SC2
How does that not compute?
Ur C+ and uve played for 12+ years, and yet u say u understand the game perfectly it seems like ur the joke here
This is what starcraft 1 looked like in beta. People didn't like it and they did a complete graphics overhaul and we have what we have now. I fully trust blizzard to act if the current version of starcraft II isn't accepted in the community.
This thread reminds me of the UFC vs Boxing interview few years ago. Haha remember this guys? When Joe started owning Lou with reasons, Lou flips out and yells "U DUN KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT BOXING ITS AN ART" Much like some of the people here U DUN KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT SC.
They've already put too much time and energy into SC2 to do a 'complete overhaul'.
I haven't played the game so I don't know if it needs one, but I'm just saying that SC1 and BW were cheaper, easier and much less time consuming then SC2 to develop.
On February 26 2010 03:16 JohannesH wrote: So... How should the pathing be changed then, to make micro interesting.
Units should only be able to move 1 matrix with every move command because otherwise it's too easy.
Make units only attack once per attack command.
To build a unit, you have to press the build button at least once every 5 seconds, otherwise the unit gets cancelled. Because, you know, otherwise macro would be too easy.
Thanks for conceding in our argument.
To JohannesH: Something simple like decrease pathfinding AI a bit or making the unit motions slightly more random and less uniform
So make the game more frustrating to the average player. Got it.
Absolutely no one likes it when your units do you something you didn't tell them to and then you have to babysit them.
I'm pretty sure that's what people are complaining about now. Too smart of an AI means units will take initiatives the player hasn't asked for.
The interviews are up but I can hardly be confident about how long they'll stay up. I'm on the lookout for new hosting options so this will never happen again. Let me know if it goes down again. I'm feeling pessimistic.
On February 26 2010 08:03 fnaticAugury wrote: The beta hasn't been out a week, 95% of the players that think they're good now won't ever play professionally. People should really stop already coming to conclusions about the game, especially if you haven't played a Beta before.
beta = feedback.
Otherwise there would be no beta duh.
But bad feedback could damage it for everyone
lol, so beta should only be for good feedback?
funny how many replies the thread has even though most of us cant even read the interviews
I meant bad quality feedback like "the game is EASY MODE, BUILT FOR NOOBS, PLEASE RETURN BAD PATHING TO GAME BLIZZARD"
This is what starcraft 1 looked like in beta. People didn't like it and they did a complete graphics overhaul and we have what we have now. I fully trust blizzard to act if the current version of starcraft II isn't accepted in the community.
no that was the alpha, the beta was much much closer to the actual game
cept tanks cost 200 gas 0 min, mutalisks had an acid spray, queens had glaive wurm, defilers had blood boil...
Also, I'd like to address people who asked for the interviews to be copy and pasted in here. + Show Spoiler +
I understand you want to read them - I obviously want you to read them, you know? - but I pay for hosting with the views I get. I'm able to interview and write about StarCraft because of the (meager) advertisement money that I get. I'm not being greedy - it doesn't even come close to covering costs - but it is at least a little bit and I need what I can get.
Please, in the future if anything does go down, do not copy and paste it onto other sites. I was working all day today to get it back up for you guys. Again, I'm paying for it, so imagine how frustrating this bad hosting is for me :[
Thanks for the reads and pray to your respective gods that it doesn't go down. Atheists? Shake your fists threateningly in the vague direction of the hosting company.
Thanks. Hope you like 'em now that you actually get to read them!
This is what starcraft 1 looked like in beta. People didn't like it and they did a complete graphics overhaul and we have what we have now. I fully trust blizzard to act if the current version of starcraft II isn't accepted in the community.
Stop posting this picture and calling it the beta. That's the prealpha/alpha like 2 years before the game came out... this is beta like 4-7 months before it's supposed to come out. Big difference
the real sc1 beta didnt have many huge changes and looked pretty much the same as the final game
On February 26 2010 12:37 choboPEon wrote: Also, I'd like to address people who asked for the interviews to be copy and pasted in here.
I understand you want to read them - I obviously want you to read them, you know? - but I pay for hosting with the views I get. I'm able to interview and write about StarCraft because of the (meager) advertisement money that I get. I'm not being greedy - it doesn't even come close to covering costs - but it is at least a little bit and I need what I can get.
Please, in the future if anything does go down, do not copy and paste it onto other sites. I was working all day today to get it back up for you guys. Again, I'm paying for it, so imagine how frustrating this bad hosting is for me :[
Thanks for the reads and pray to your respective gods that it doesn't go down. Atheists? Shake your fists threateningly in the vague direction of the hosting company.
Thanks. Hope you like 'em now that you actually get to read them!
On February 26 2010 12:37 choboPEon wrote: Also, I'd like to address people who asked for the interviews to be copy and pasted in here.
I understand you want to read them - I obviously want you to read them, you know? - but I pay for hosting with the views I get. I'm able to interview and write about StarCraft because of the (meager) advertisement money that I get. I'm not being greedy - it doesn't even come close to covering costs - but it is at least a little bit and I need what I can get.
Please, in the future if anything does go down, do not copy and paste it onto other sites. I was working all day today to get it back up for you guys. Again, I'm paying for it, so imagine how frustrating this bad hosting is for me :[
Thanks for the reads and pray to your respective gods that it doesn't go down. Atheists? Shake your fists threateningly in the vague direction of the hosting company.
Thanks. Hope you like 'em now that you actually get to read them!
but ya seriously so many of you guys are getting trolled by these noobies. I have no idea why you guys are even responding to these retards, they obv have no idea what they are talking about and no amount of convincing will help.
On February 26 2010 13:20 Zapdos_Smithh wrote: nice interviews.
but ya seriously so many of you guys are getting trolled by these noobies. I have no idea why you guys are even responding to these retards, they obv have no idea what they are talking about and no amount of convincing will help.
i'm just wondering how all of this spiraled out of control when 99% of the 30k views didnt read the actual quotes. strange.
its always humorous when n00bsters from other RTS games come on TL.net and act like they know more than senior members of the Starcraft community about how SC2 needs to be in order to be a worthy successor of the greatest (or only?) RTS game ever made. The aforementioned n00blets tend to be more eager to voice their opinions whenever issues like MBS, automining, auto-surround, pathfinding,intrusively high unit AI and other automations are discussed.
Guys, we like your fancy analogies and fine debating skills. But please, most of us have been playing Starcraft since 1998. so here's a tip; Shut the fuck up?
it's that simple. you don't need to complicate it. You don't need to be an intuitive genius to know that all these things will dangerously degrade Starcraft 2's gameplay both at a casual and professional level. And since in Starcrafting terms, gameplay is King, all the cool looking features like amazing graphics and being able to add your grandmother on B.net 2.0 won't salvage SC2's capacity to potentially become one of the greatest hobbies of this decade.
Haters Gunna Hate. Haters Gunna Hate. But sometimes you just have to skate. sometimes you have to take the debate. And put it on a plate. And let the rest be fate. Sit back and take some Pillz.
Haters Gunna Hate. Haters Gunna Hate. I hate to underestimate. Your Starcraft great. But you can't relate. To me- the starcraft great. I want to make it straight. That you over estimate. Your skillz.
Haters gunna Hate. Haters gunna Hate. You desecrate. TL's growth rate. With your debate. So just fucking leave.
Cool interviews! There's some good points in both Louder and Chill views. Although i tend to think like Chill that micro is not created but come out of necessity.
great interviews, especially the Chill/Louder ones. Although i think that Louder is overrating the PvP proxy gates - every game i watched that strategy so far, the dude who went for proxy gates got totally stomped.
Wow, choboPEon you are a very excellent writer!!! Reading your interviews makes me feel like I am reading a magazine along the lines of Sports Illustrated. Keep up the good work, I look forward to your future articles.
i think we don't have a real consensus among TL members as to whether SC2 is good or not
a bunch of people are saying its not that good because of the AI and other stuff and another bunch of people, like Psyonic_Reaver etc, seem to enjoy it because they "havent been sleeping much since the beta came out" and are happy to tell everyone that they place near the top of their platinum leagues, but no one except for Liquid'Drone is saying that the game is straight up really good
the most common type of feedback seems to be; yeah dude, im playing a lot, im like #3 on that golden plated platinum league
The more I read, the less I care about what Western "pro gamers" have to say.
Its a new game, deal with it, don't play it, play it, whatever. Oh and actions per minute has absolutely nothing to with strategic depth; the constant babysitting and clicking going on in SC1 creates a high skill ceiling but we could achieve the same thing by making you play Simon Says each time you want to move a unit in SC2. Strategy it ain't.
After getting into chess a bit more I can see that SC1 is not a strategically deep game, no RTS is. Just enjoy the gameplay instead of getting butthurt about "catering to casuals", and thank the Gods Blizzard doesn't hate you like Nintendo does so there's no tripping in SC2.
"When you multitask 3 separate groups of units....thats micromanaging them.
How much simpler of a definition do you want?"
You can get fancy and obscure / simplify definitions until the eagles choke but you get what hes trying to say. If the only macro is click hotkey 1 + press a move on map, repeat for hotkey 2 and 3 then thats technically micro but pretty fucking lame and obivously not what this community strives for.
its always humorous when n00bsters from other RTS games come on TL.net and act like they know more than senior members of the Starcraft community about how SC2 needs to be in order to be a worthy successor of the greatest (or only?) RTS game ever made. The aforementioned n00blets tend to be more eager to voice their opinions whenever issues like MBS, automining, auto-surround, pathfinding,intrusively high unit AI and other automations are discussed.
Guys, we like your fancy analogies and fine debating skills. But please, most of us have been playing Starcraft since 1998. so here's a tip; Shut the fuck up?
it's that simple. you don't need to complicate it. You don't need to be an intuitive genius to know that all these things will dangerously degrade Starcraft 2's gameplay both at a casual and professional level. And since in Starcrafting terms, gameplay is King, all the cool looking features like amazing graphics and being able to add your grandmother on B.net 2.0 won't salvage SC2's capacity to potentially become one of the greatest hobbies of this decade.
Added spoilers to make my post smaller and less obnoxious
On February 26 2010 22:19 FieryBalrog wrote: The more I read, the less I care about what Western "pro gamers" have to say.
Its a new game, deal with it, don't play it, play it, whatever. Oh and actions per minute has absolutely nothing to with strategic depth; the constant babysitting and clicking going on in SC1 creates a high skill ceiling but we could achieve the same thing by making you play Simon Says each time you want to move a unit in SC2. Strategy it ain't.
After getting into chess a bit more I can see that SC1 is not a strategically deep game, no RTS is. Just enjoy the gameplay instead of getting butthurt about "catering to casuals", and thank the Gods Blizzard doesn't hate you like Nintendo does so there's no tripping in SC2.
There is a spectrum. Just because SC1 is not Chess does not mean has no strategic depth. There's a middle ground.
Also, planning the most effective and efficient actions possible for your capabilities (your APM) has at least a tiny bit of strategy involved.
It's not chess (it's been around a decade, for god's sake), but it's not without strategy.
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
I've read other threads that have addressed this issue, and halfway through this one without hearing anyone approach the actual (fairly obvious, actually )solution to this problem:
The solution is not "completely inert AI requiring clickfest babysitting" VS "super intelligent AI requiring no player input"
The solution is:
"competent AI with intelligent pathfinding, that is augmented by special moves for each unit"
Analogy:
What separated the kick ass player from the average guy in Mortal Combat?
Answer:
Special Moves:
Each fighting charachter had a basic sequence of moves that it could do simply. If you pressed one, maybe two buttons fast enough you could kick straight, or punch straight.
If you added more buttons to a sequence you could do more sophisticated moves: roundhouse kicks, and uppercuts. Some of these were only effective if you had your avatar in the right position vs your opponents.
However, the uber Special Moves were the Fatalities:
If you knew the moves and could execute them fast enough in the right sequence, 4 or 5 button presses would do those wicked cool Fatalities that made everyone laugh .. they totally kicked ass.
This is what Starcraft needs for every unit.
The answer is to add special micro abilities to every unit, and make them precise enough to be difficult to pull off with consistency in the heat of strategizing, macroing and battle.
It's things like using the Patrol button to force a retreating Vulture to fire at pursuing zerglings on the move. It involves tweaking the "auto surround" to only take effect when say ... you have a group of zerglings selected, then right clicking on a target, then immediately right clicking twice *behind* the target to activate the surround.
In this way you satisfy all parties, the casual gamers (mass sales) that Blizz needs to profit ...and the truly skilled players that will elevate the game from a casual hobby to an art.
Peeps need to step outside the "either / or" box that they are trapped in in order to see this /obvious
.
So basically make every unit a spellcaster
This is close to what WC3 did, and we see how well-loved that game is on here.
No, not what I am proposing does not involved making every unit a spellcaster ... at all.
The solution to the micro problem is so elegant and simple I think I might make a new thread for this so that peeps can brainstorm on it.
I wrote that the solution to the micro problem is "Additive Micro Abilities". This does not equal spellcasting.
Lets use the Vulture example again. Here's a video someone made of a Vulture micro trick
By using the Patrol command and clicking in the proper way on the screen - in front then back of the unit in rapid succession - you can attack (fire) while moving away from the pursuing units.
Either by intent or by accident Blizzard allowed you to make the Vulture do something it wouldn't ordinary be able to do ... unless you know about this and are skilled enough to do it.
Regardless of how this kind of thing came about, this kind of thing is what brings the concept of "micro" up to another level - and allows the depth of gameplay peeps are craving - without making the game impossible to play for new players.
Other examples:
'Hold Lurkers' by clicking on a building in the fog of war to keep the Lurkers hidden until the victim is on top of you. 'Muta Stacking' to trick mutas into clumping up into a more concentrated force.
What kind of abilities can be added to SC2 units to make them more finely controlled? Here's one off the top of my head:
Units have a tendency to clump up more in groups when issued a move command. This is a result of the more intelligent pathing.
How about adding a simple spread command for groups of selected units. Again off the top of my head:
Select units in a group. Move the group. As the group is moving, click on the screen twice (Left, Right) in rapid enough succession in front of the group. The group will then spread in a line formation.
If you don't think this is a workable control scheme, then think of another one. Possibly using a special designated 'micro' hotkey in conjunction with screen clicks.
But the core of what I am saying is the answer to this whole issue. Never mind that I dont have a 5000 postcount and a D+ rating on ICCUP (LOL). It still is
On February 25 2010 22:23 BlackYoshi wrote: did you just want a reskinned Brood War, with all the same AI flaws? What is your exact suggestion to "add micro" back in to the game?
I've read other threads that have addressed this issue, and halfway through this one without hearing anyone approach the actual (fairly obvious, actually )solution to this problem:
The solution is not "completely inert AI requiring clickfest babysitting" VS "super intelligent AI requiring no player input"
The solution is:
"competent AI with intelligent pathfinding, that is augmented by special moves for each unit"
Analogy:
What separated the kick ass player from the average guy in Mortal Combat?
Answer:
Special Moves:
Each fighting charachter had a basic sequence of moves that it could do simply. If you pressed one, maybe two buttons fast enough you could kick straight, or punch straight.
If you added more buttons to a sequence you could do more sophisticated moves: roundhouse kicks, and uppercuts. Some of these were only effective if you had your avatar in the right position vs your opponents.
However, the uber Special Moves were the Fatalities:
If you knew the moves and could execute them fast enough in the right sequence, 4 or 5 button presses would do those wicked cool Fatalities that made everyone laugh .. they totally kicked ass.
This is what Starcraft needs for every unit.
The answer is to add special micro abilities to every unit, and make them precise enough to be difficult to pull off with consistency in the heat of strategizing, macroing and battle.
It's things like using the Patrol button to force a retreating Vulture to fire at pursuing zerglings on the move. It involves tweaking the "auto surround" to only take effect when say ... you have a group of zerglings selected, then right clicking on a target, then immediately right clicking twice *behind* the target to activate the surround.
In this way you satisfy all parties, the casual gamers (mass sales) that Blizz needs to profit ...and the truly skilled players that will elevate the game from a casual hobby to an art.
Peeps need to step outside the "either / or" box that they are trapped in in order to see this /obvious
.
So basically make every unit a spellcaster
This is close to what WC3 did, and we see how well-loved that game is on here.
No, not what I am proposing does not involved making every unit a spellcaster ... at all.
The solution to the micro problem is so elegant and simple I think I might make a new thread for this so that peeps can brainstorm on it.
I wrote that the solution to the micro problem is "Additive Micro Abilities". This does not equal spellcasting.
Lets use the Vulture example again. Here's a video someone made of a Vulture micro trick
By using the Patrol command and clicking in the proper way on the screen - in front then back of the unit in rapid succession - you can attack (fire) while moving away from the pursuing units.
Either by intent or by accident Blizzard allowed you to make the Vulture do something it wouldn't ordinary be able to do ... unless you know about this and are skilled enough to do it.
Regardless of how this kind of thing came about, this kind of thing is what brings the concept of "micro" up to another level - and allows the depth of gameplay peeps are craving - without making the game impossible to play for new players.
Other examples:
'Hold Lurkers' by clicking on a building in the fog of war to keep the Lurkers hidden until the victim is on top of you. 'Muta Stacking' to trick mutas into clumping up into a more concentrated force.
What kind of abilities can be added to SC2 units to make them more finely controlled? Here's one off the top of my head:
Units have a tendency to clump up more in groups when issued a move command. This is a result of the more intelligent pathing.
How about adding a simple spread command for groups of selected units. Again off the top of my head:
Select units in a group. Move the group. As the group is moving, click on the screen twice (Left, Right) in rapid enough succession in front of the group. The group will then spread in a line formation.
If you don't think this is a workable control scheme, then think of another one. Possibly using a special designated 'micro' hotkey in conjunction with screen clicks.
But the core of what I am saying is the answer to this whole issue. Never mind that I dont have a 5000 postcount and a D+ rating on ICCUP (LOL). It still is
Good read, but ultimately, those are bugs, and blizzard fixed them in SC2 or made it into an actual function, such as hold fire (different command from hold position).