GosuGamers StarCraft | Thread: SC BW and SC II is a difference like..

Membership

Forgot password?

Navigation

News

Replays

Forum

GosuBet

Rankings

Blogs

Latest StarCraft VODs

[SPL] CJ vs SKT set 2

47 minutes ago

[SPL] CJ vs SKT set 1

47 minutes ago

[SPL] ACE vs STX Soul Set 2

18 hours ago

[SPL] ACE vs STX Soul Set 1

18 hours ago

[SPL] Samsung Khan vs Woongjin Stars Set 3

19 hours ago

» View all VODs (201)

Search

Forums \ StarCraft forum \ SC BW and SC II is a difference like..

1, 2

1 year ago

#21

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 3

b-boSs

sorry for saying it but it's $$$ crap that every 10 year old kid can play

c'mon what's point of selecting all my factories, raxes and ccs on just one hot key and build every unit??

in my point of view scbw is much more entertaining, every new game you try to play better, faster and smarter. sc2 is super boring like w3. i don't like it in way that #3 wrote.

but i get ppl saying sc2 is cool because there isn't that big difference in skill levels. you don't need to spend whole week playing one mu to get only small better. but that's what force you to play the game more than a year or two

imo if EA released game like sc2 noone would care about it

Quote

1 year ago

#22

Big stars represents five levels - This user is on level 17

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 17

PsychoBaBas

#21

"but i get ppl saying sc2 is cool because there isn't that big difference in skill levels."

Disagree.

http://sc2ranks.com/stats/

4% for Diamond
12% for Platinum
20% for Gold
23% for Silver
41% for Bronze <--- *holy shit what is going on there?!*

As you can see, diamond players are only 4% of the total number of online SC2 players in the world. Look at the bronze one: 41-fucking-percent in all regions is bronze.

I started off in bronze (yeah i know...) cauz I messed around and lost 4 out of the 5 trial games. I can assure you the bronze league is really really bad. We are talking about D- stuff in iccup. I had to make my slow way to high platinum and should be breaking into diamond soon, so I have seen almost every league.

If you are a diamond player consider yourself the creme de la creme!

This post was edited by a forum moderator @ 1 year ago

Quote

1 year ago

#23

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 1

BooGieMaN

I have never played SCBW (well i have tried it years ago but didnt really get in to it then) and i have just started playing SC2 not long ago so yes, im a huge noob but i still want to point out my view on this topic.

I dont think that these changes in SC2 (being able to select multiple structures and build units from them all at once, automining stuff etc) make this game easier. I see it as an improvement to old and inefficient SC1 controls system. Yes, those changes makes it easier to manage resource gathering/unit building, it lets you do it faster SO you have more time to focus on other things.

It is like real war, people always try to invent new things/technologies that would allow them to do something in an easier, faster way so they can concentrate on other, more important things.
I mean whats the point in having to select all your 10 rax one by one to build units in them when you can just select them all by one button click and then use the time you saved on, lets say, microing your army at the enemy base?
Or not having to worry about telling your every singe SCV to go gather recources at a specific spot might allow you to create/develop your strategy, find and exploit your opponents weaknesses EVEN MORE EFFICIENTLY.

No matter how good you are, you cant play perfectly all the time when you play against another person just because there are so many factors that you have to adress. In the end, the better player wins. The "all pros will be playing perfectly" argument is surely invalid :)

I think that all those players who say that SC2 is easier than SC1 just feel that they have spent too much of time and effort learning the inefficient SC1 controls system to get an advantage, and they dont want to lose this advantage now.
I think they should look at this as an improvement that allows them to play EVEN BETTER, adapt and use this improvent to become better at other aspects of the game.

SC1 = more button clicking, less emphasis on the overall game.
SC2 = less button clicking, more emphasis on other things.

As i said, its just a newbies opinion :)

Quote

1 year ago

#24

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 2

stray

@22 before you state such crap i advice to reconsider a very simple question:
how many ppl that are totally lame retards at strategy games, played SC1 on icc ?
how many ppl of that kind play SC2?

Bronze league... yeah. how many of them are just abbandoned accounts ?

"I can assure you the bronze league is really really bad. We are talking about D- stuff in iccup."

You really believe they would make it to sustain D- instead of falling to E? ;]

My friend never had a lousy C- on iCC, and he got to the Diamond - i will clarify it to you DIAMOND - FUCKING BEST EVER - DIAMOND LEAGUE in like 2 weeks of playing, so cut the crap with all the "it's a hard game, coz I'm lame in it and I needed so much time and effort to get to the diamond, and I have mere platinum"

what was your best rank on iCC ?

@23

"I dont think that these changes in SC2 (being able to select multiple structures and build units from them all at once, automining stuff etc) make this game easier.

I presume that if you'd understand the meaning of macro, you'd undestand that this isn't true.

"when you can just select them all by one button click and then use the time you saved on, lets say, microing your army at the enemy base?"

There was a time when managing stuff was called SKILL - before the EMO era emerged, and everyone is proving, that it's not the case of themselves, but it's the case of the imperfect design of the universe.

"find and exploit your opponents weaknesses EVEN MORE EFFICIENTLY."

this also was called SKILL and IMPROVEMENT OF SKILL in the old days...

no one has stated the argument about "pro's playing perfect" altough this might be truth if the korean progamers would have anything in common with the game for like a month.

While I read your post I can't get over the feeling that blizzard has paid you for advertisement ;]

stating that making a game easier would make one better is childlish.
you are also mixing up the mechanics with the gameplay, and you put too much attention to 'clicking' instead of the sense of it - just like noobs that force high apm by spamming.

gl hf in the noob world of warcraft4... errrm I meant starcraft2.

This post was edited by its author @ 1 year ago

Quote

1 year ago

#25

veinturan

#24 Do you really think it would be good to make the game harder by making you have a maxlimit of selected units etc? This is just retarded, its like making the controls worse on purpose to make the game harder, why would you? Imho control or gamelimits should not set the skilllevel of players, practise should!

It sure is a lot easier in the aspect of micro, but its equal for everyone... This does not make good players bad, because there are other things that seperate pros from bad players, like understanding of the game, tactics, timing etc.

I agree that sc2 is not for hardcore sc-nerds, but who cares? It is a fun game, give it some time and some really good players will be out there!

I guess you are just mad because you waited 7 years for this game and got dissapointed.

Quote

1 year ago

#26

PsychoBaBas

#24

Relax.
I was just pinpointing that there is a big difference in skill levels proportionally. Of course you cant compare iccup and getting to diamond. Why all this aggression?

Quote

1 year ago

#27

stray

#26
i think that the aggression came from a really bad day.
#25
actually i didn't wait for sc2. I agree that the interface of the game shoudn't set the skill, but actually they don't do in any game. the interface is equal for all of players. and as to skill itself, there is quite a tiny dexterity needed to get C- ( 200+ apm is needed to make B or A things, not C- or less) if the player isn't spamming, but quite a brain to manage to this rank.

what i don't like in sc2 is it's warcraft3likeness for example. and i don't imagine playing on constant lag.

and as someone has pointed out - it's quite a heavy game as it is to hardware needed for it to work. the graphics actually substitutes the gameplay.

Quote

1 year ago

#28

Novac

I really like SC2 and once it has aged a bit and been patched it should be excellent. However I do agree that it is quite a bit easier than SC:BW though I can only comment on this from a spectator stand point as I never played much SC:BW after the first few years. I also think that it should be quite easy to fix and perhaps we will see some changes in the coming expansions.

What SC2 needs the most IMO is the need for multitasking skill. They could do this without ruining it for people who just play casually.

First of all, I don't think that the way to bump the APM and macro requirements is to go back to 12 selected units max, harvesters not going to the mineral patch automatically, etc. I think they should introduce more new macro and micro opportunities instead. In short, simply include the amount of attention and APM needed to do use an ability in the calculations of the cost.

An example of micro, could be introducing more things like the spider mine that you could drag into enemies and allies alike and could be destroyed if you were on to of it. As an example could the Hunter seeker missile be made to cost a little less but could be killed by focus fire (not just an 1a2a3a move) and maybe do damage to friendly units as well. These kinds of mechanics should of course be added to all races but it was just an example. Having more things like friendly fire will also increase the amount of "wow moments" in the games as good players can get an advantage some skilled dragging or picking off the missiles in the air.

Another thing could be adding more APM intensive macro mechanics. A lot of people on forums are saying that the Queens spawn larvae ability should be made autocast. This I think would be a step in the wrong direction. I think the macro mechanics of the other races should be made more macro intensive and that more should be added in general.

Please don't take this following example as a "NERF TERRAN" suggestion, but if we compare Inject larvae with the MULE ability it is clear that Inject larvae is on a timer and is something the player should be on top of constantly, while if a Terran player gets behind on his MULEs he can just call down several at once which will result in the same amount of minerals. The terran player is essentially banking minerals when banking energy.
As an example they could make the MULEs more macro intensive by limiting how many could be called down at once or something similar, in an effort to add more multitasking to the game. MULE's income rate might then need to be buffed to maintain balance, but my point is not balance, it is to add more macro intensive mechanics to the game.

So as I see it they could quite easily keep the game mostly as it is and greatly increase the skill level needed to play it while still having a fun game for new players.

Quote

1 year ago

#29

SKT.Stax

@28

I think you are right with your ideas. I agree with the point of macro mechanics and I think Blizzard wanted to give some macro intensive things. As well it would be awesome to intodruce some more micro intensive things as you mentioned. I think the way in TvP is a good example with Ghosts and Templars. The one, who uses his abilities better there wins the fight. I think Blizzard should add some of those things in the 2nd and 3rd part of SC II at least. So I think to add some of those things would require a higher APM in macro and micro as well, which would be new and awesome. So good idea man, we should post it to Blizzard

All time favourites: Zacard | Bisu | Mondi | FoxeR

Quote

1 year ago

#30

SKT.Stax

All time favourites: Zacard | Bisu | Mondi | FoxeR

Quote

1 year ago

#31

maxxxi

there are so many ways of became good at sc2 in this moment, its all done.... when i started playing scbw, there was no replays, no vods, no lan tournaments, nothing at all... you have to improve just playing like an animal. :)

Quote

1 year ago

#32

Big stars represents five levels - This user is on level 6

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 6

LRM)Cats_Paw

In sc1 I was a B player when i was like top of my shape, now im about C max, in sc2, withouth knowing the game i got to diamond in 20 games from gold.
The only reason i am getting there is becouse when i started playing i as Protoss i found out i was easily killed by maradeurs.
I did some math and found out what "makes sense" to do, and started winning.
The problem is not if the game is ballanced or not, its the fact that the unit counters are so game breaking.

In sc1, lings were usefull, in any part of the game, just on late game, you needed better multitaskin,flanking etc. This goes for almost every unit in sc1, they all had some use, depended on the playe to make good use of them.

I sc2 its not like that, higher tier units can change a game around in few minutes.
Thats why i think sc2 is not anywere near enought to balanced, and probably never will be.

some people may argue that sc2 will be balanced eventually and the game will be more demanding in micro or general control, but i belive the huge changes from one tier to another in units is like sc1 marines vs sieged tanks, so if they start balancing stuff, they will have to remake the whole game.

Now, about if sc1 was more demending? It is now, if u go to icc and want to get to A rank you can kiss your ass goodbye in frustration after getting stuck at C rank.
In sc2, once that 4% (40k ppl aint little ladies) drops to lets say 2k players like in icc higher ranks, getting there will be a pain in the ass, but it wont be becouse of a perfect base/unit control. It will be who can make great drops and still do the rest well.

This post was edited by its author @ 1 year ago

Quote

1 year ago

#33

SKT.Stax

#32

I think a bit the same. It is a problem that high tear units can change the game so fast and I dont like that fact as well. The reason Marine/Medics & Vessells were the whole game long good in TvP made the matchup (in my oppinion) to the best matchup in SCBW. The PvZ was nice as well. Also if the Protoss got Reaver and/or High Templar, the Zerg was able to build Hydras which werent that bad the whole game as long as the Protoss were under pressure. TvP were mostly this intense macro games.
As well I come to the conclusion as you did, that this Higher Tech is to good against the lower tech. But well SCBW will be maybe just an Utopi of gamming and never again a game can reach it..

All time favourites: Zacard | Bisu | Mondi | FoxeR

Quote

1 year ago

#34

ezprodigy

of course sc bw is harder than sc 2 now, i mean sc's got 11 years of community perfecting strategies for it and players get more and more skilled, sc2 hasn't even been out for 2 month. Most of the top sc2 players now came from sc or wc3 and none of the are the best of those games. compare idra/dimaga's micro and macro vs jeadong/flash, or lucifron/demuslim vs sky/moon/grubby. All the real top players are going to have to play sc2 soon since their game is dieing plus there's going to be a bunch of new talents. All the sc2 top pros would be noobs in a few years compared to the new people. if would be more fair to compare sc2 to sc when sc2 had a few years to mature.

Quote

1 year ago

#35

Big stars represents five levels - This user is on level 9

Small stars represents one level - This user is on level 9

inco

I haven't played it myself but I liked what a friend of mine said:

"Even though some things have been made easier in SC2, other things have been implemented to make it just as hard as BW. You'll see that even though Chrono Boost is a great ability and it's obvious how important it is to use, even gamers like White-Ra are too busy at times to keep it up at all times."

Something along those lines, at least.

Personally, I think it's utter bullshit to make any particular claims one way or the other now that SC2 is as young as it is. It's also rather dumb to point at BW gamers "ruling" the SC2 scene because the game is so easy, while it's far more likely that BW gamers have the mechanics and general understanding of the game genre.

I myself am afraid of change, something I admit unlike 90% of the other haters, but I also admit that SC2 seems to have a lot of potential.

Quote

1, 2

Forum post

Do to others what you would have them do to you.

Do not judge so that you will not be judged.

» Read posting rules in detail

Reminder: IP-addresses for the comments are saved. Offensive posts will be censored. Repeated offense will result in a warning and/or a temporary account lockdown.

SC BW and SC II is a difference like.. \ Reply

To submit a post, you have to be a registred member. Register an account below the title 'Membership' in the left menu.

» Top of the page