2v2 could be really cool, BW had/has a pretty active 2v2 scene. From a casual perspective most players enjoy or at least play 2v2 more than 1v1.
2v2's future in SC2 - Page 11
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Kazang
578 Posts
2v2 could be really cool, BW had/has a pretty active 2v2 scene. From a casual perspective most players enjoy or at least play 2v2 more than 1v1. | ||
ManyCookies
1164 Posts
| ||
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On April 10 2011 01:49 dacthehork wrote: There is a reason it got taken out of broodwar No one wants to be the "2v2 player" just for clan events. 1v1 is where all the tournaments and big matches are, in broodwar it ended up hurting a lot of players having to just focus on 2v2. Not really, it actually rewarded oldschool players with a lot of experience and great teamwork. You think that Reach, Yellow, Clon or Nestea could have an OSL after 2006 if they didn't practice for 2x2 ? lol... They basicly started a new career and they could get play time because of 2x2. Oh and Clon retired when 2x2 got taken out of broodwar because he was mediocre at 1x1. If it didn't happen i'm pretty sure Nestea would be still playing 2x2 with Reach for KT lol. Also 2x2 in broodwar was amazing if it was played on good maps ( Iron Curtain or Hannibal for example ). | ||
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
Queens on the ramp, Banelings hidden in the natural. Chrono'd Stalkers on the ramp. Questions? | ||
Gnosis
Scotland912 Posts
On April 10 2011 02:31 MangoTango wrote: Queens on the ramp, Banelings hidden in the natural. Chrono'd Stalkers on the ramp. Questions? I'll give it a shot and get back to you. | ||
FenneK
France1231 Posts
It wouldn't interest me in the slightest though. | ||
Ponyo
United States1231 Posts
| ||
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
On April 09 2011 02:48 Sandster wrote: The thing is, people have been saying this about WoW for years. Blizz simply won't separate pve and pvp, and I highly doubt they'll separate 1v1 from team games for sc2. I don't get why they wouldn't if it improves the gameplay for both sides. In WoWs case I even find it more retarded not to separate something that is causing them headaches for so long already. This could make 1v1 a lot more interesting too because they don't have to take team games inconsideration with balance. lolcarrierslol. | ||
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
On April 10 2011 02:31 MangoTango wrote: Queens on the ramp, Banelings hidden in the natural. Chrono'd Stalkers on the ramp. Questions? Don't forget the evo and Roach Warren for the obvious Banshee followup. Don't bother with Lair. | ||
Cevari
Finland74 Posts
Would be very interested to see competetive 2v2 as a standalone event though, but not sure if that'll have the necessary draw. | ||
Omlas
Hungary43 Posts
A competetive ladder could help too where you wont be paired in imbalanced teams. I mean what ppl expecting when playing vs PP team as ZT for example, obv they gonna cheese bc thats their best bet, why bother to playing for 10-20 mins just to end up losing? Im not saying a PP team can never win, but if they would do, thats would be because of skill difference, why waste the time than? Just finish the game early and start a next one where they hope gonna be paired into a team that actually makes sense. That way maybe not just only 1 match from every 5 would worth to play through or be interesting and people would stop hating the gametype. Id be gladly watch 2v2s myself, a whole league or just matches in team leagues but im affraid with the current state of the game, and the common prejudice wont allow that for a long time =( | ||
TheArtOfFugue
Canada187 Posts
2v2 is also shorter than your average 1v1, so I doubt people would complain about the length/boredom level of the games. | ||
Sandster
United States4054 Posts
On April 10 2011 01:23 Grumbels wrote: I don't get why people say this. Spells work not just differently in PvE and PvP, there are also talent specs made to let you specialize, so that Blizzard can change those talents to influence PvP/PvE balance separately. Unfortunately, this way of balancing doesn't work for SC2, since basically you'd need to have units or strategies that are essentially only used in teamgames, not solo play. (so you can change those strats without affecting 1v1) Well this is getting a bit off topic but I'm simply saying what Blizzard's philosophy has been. If they actually stick to a design philosophy of separating pvp and pve specs for each class, the game would be much more balanced and competitive, but Blizzard does not do that. Relating to sc2, balanced has to be focused for a specific bracket. Sc2 is mainly balanced around 1v1, so of course there are team unit compositions (e.g. hellion/speedling, ol giving sight for warp ins, etc) that simply cannot be balanced without completely changing 1v1. The same is true in wow; for example, you absolutely needed a shaman in 5v5 but not so much 2v2/3v3, and ring of frost is good in 3v3 but turns retardedly overpowered in bgs. What would you suggest for balanced 2v2/3v3/4v4 matches in sc2? There are unit compositions at all stages of the game which are brutally difficult to deal with, ranging from hellion/speedling pushes, 4gates with ol for sight, and colo backed up with MMMV. On April 10 2011 05:30 TheArtOfFugue wrote: Totally agree, it would be a novelty and I would definitely tune in out of curiosity. 2v2 is also shorter than your average 1v1, so I doubt people would complain about the length/boredom level of the games. The competitive 2v2 scene will need to grow first. Remember all the scv/marine all-ins in early GSL seasons and how much that sucked? Likewise, imagine if you watched an entire tournament of only protoss players 4gating each other. | ||
| ||