Personally I feel 2v2 in SC2 to be better balanced than in BW, but the maps need to be bigger if played competively. But most of all it needs to be integrated into tournaments on a larger scale, preferably having some tourneys of its own, to make people consider it a viable mode aside 1v1 instead of just an amusing distraction.
2v2's future in SC2 - Page 3
Forum Index > SC2 General |
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
Personally I feel 2v2 in SC2 to be better balanced than in BW, but the maps need to be bigger if played competively. But most of all it needs to be integrated into tournaments on a larger scale, preferably having some tourneys of its own, to make people consider it a viable mode aside 1v1 instead of just an amusing distraction. | ||
Chronald
United States619 Posts
I would say that it has a 90-95% win rate against any team with a protoss. How is that balanced? Do you want to ruin 1v1 so that we can have lack-luster 2v2? Get serious. | ||
dpr.whap
9 Posts
| ||
TwilightStar
United States649 Posts
On April 08 2011 01:15 da_head wrote: nope team games have no place in competitive play. take the strength of cheese play and multiply it by multiple players, and all you have is a cheese fest. Anyone who doesn't think team games have a place in competitive play has an absurd way of looking at SC. You obviously haven't played team games, so please refrain from saying things like this. | ||
Beyonder
Netherlands15103 Posts
| ||
Chronald
United States619 Posts
On April 08 2011 03:42 TwilightStar wrote: I don't think people understand how dynamic team games are in SC2 now... They definitely have a place in tournaments (Mainly 2v2). Anyone who doesn't think team games have a place in competitive play has an absurd way of looking at SC. You obviously haven't played team games, so please refrain from saying things like this. Have you played team games against good ppl? Players who abuse the OP unit combos? All my team game friends play TZ and rush hellion speedling almost every game, and win almost every game. I understand that this is a balance issue, but to address it would ruin parts of the MUCH more important 1v1 game. 2v2 will be an ugly-step child for SC2 until Blizzard either makes a stand-alone balance setup for team games, or people give up on trying to make something out of nothing. | ||
imRiChY
Norway31 Posts
Anyways, openers and especially mid/late-game strategies are continually evolving these days, so given some time, I think 2v2 can be played competetively at a really high level, and be very fun to watch from a spectators point of view. I wrote quite a long post about balance and the current state of 2v2 (my opinions). Check it out and please feel free to discuss what I mentioned there Current State Of 2v2 | ||
Skillver
Austria1309 Posts
You just have to care about the map pool, because zerg amtchups are imbalanced on certain maps. You can contact me if you need further information. Oh and check out Richys post, it is so full of great infos | ||
LittLeD
Sweden7973 Posts
| ||
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
| ||
OFCORPSE
Sweden355 Posts
| ||
RedMosquito
United States280 Posts
| ||
DuneBug
United States668 Posts
Ling/ ranged unit openings are too powerful currently if the opponents are in separate bases that are far apart. Mostly a problem with TZ teams.. as ling/reaper, ling/helion,ling/mm pretty much beat everything. I'd blame most of that on the maps though, blizzard clearly doesn't recognize that strategies like that are impossible to stop and keeps cranking out shitty maps like Gutterhulk & Omega Sector High Orbit is actually a pretty good map, the only imbalance is zerg is really not able to fast expand. Discord IV is not bad. It'd be better if the mains had some open space area around them to make them more vulnerable to drops. I also like Tempest. I feel like that's a really solid map for 2v2. Ruins of Tarsonis is bad, too easy to take 3 bases and too hard to harass, usually ends up a 200/200 battle for everyone. Reminds me of twilight fortress. But hell we can make our own maps. Also I feel like the 2v2 game in a team fight should be like.. a tie breaker? or something. Or like the lead off match to pick who gets map choice in round 1. At least until we've seen a lot of team matches and know what to expect. And No i don't advocate balancing for 2v2 if it affects 1v1. They should patch the game types individually if they want 2v2 to become a viable format. | ||
Sqq
Norway2023 Posts
| ||
Zocat
Germany2229 Posts
But then again, I never watched/played competetive 2on2. How should I know if it turns out to be awesome / horrible? Also it's your money, and it only takes the place of the Ace match in the team match (4x 1on1, 1x 2on2) so I dont see it too much affecting the series. So if you think it might be worthwhile to have that, go for it. If after one season you realize "All the matches were boring to watch this sucked" just get rid of it. Just try it, if you think it might be fun - we dont really know yet. | ||
Disconnect
United States84 Posts
If you want to play a competitive team game there are much better games out there. | ||
Gudeldar
United States1200 Posts
| ||
Cain0
United Kingdom608 Posts
| ||
PinkPrincess
United States149 Posts
It's a cheese-fest in the sense that aggressive builds are typically the best because it's more difficult to defend against two people hitting a single spot than it is one person hitting a single spot. If both teams play well, it's entirely possible to block the "cheesy" play and then transition into a macro game. I feel that a lot of people who don't play 2v2 much try it a bit, are not good at it, and thus die to the early aggression. Rather than improving their team play knowledge / skill, they then disregard the game as being a "no skill cheese fest". | ||
Heraklitus
United States553 Posts
On April 07 2011 16:52 EonShiKeno wrote: You can't have 2v2 balance as well as 1v1, unless you have two different games. That would be very confusing. Wont happen. Still love playing it anyway. I agree with this guy completely. The game just isn't balanced for 2v2. You can't have both. So you'd either have to re-balance for each, which would be weird, or just not do it. | ||
| ||