Starcraft II

Discussion in 'Computers, Electronics, IT & Gaming' started by Arterial, Jul 12, 2011.

  1. Arterial

    Arterial Dreamer

    Messages:
    730
    Likes Received:
    109
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Does anyone else here play SC2?

    Besides guitar, SC probably eats up the most of my time.

    I've been playing since Beta and before that I've been playing SC1.

    I know Starcraft isn't exactly a "bro" game but yeah =]
     
    thatguy87 likes this.
  2. SirMyghin

    SirMyghin The Dirt Guy Contributor

    Messages:
    7,873
    Likes Received:
    600
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Location:
    Anywhere but here.
    I played the Beta and a lot for the first few months of launch, but the whole extreme league orientation for team games and such kind of killed off (at least in my circles) the whole get 8 friends and have rotating team matches.
     
  3. groph

    groph SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,748
    Likes Received:
    404
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    I'm too much of a casual RTS player to get into a game like Starcraft II, which was created and balanced for that super competitive play. That's just not enjoyable at all to me, it's all tactics and no strategy. X build order counters Y build order, the meta-game dictates what you build, etc.

    Had a great time with the campaign though, but I never play it online. Not the kind of "strategy" game I enjoy, I'm into ones like Supreme Commander 2, and even that game is cutting it close.

    WHY DID THE FIRST SUPREME COMMANDER HAVE TO BE WRITTEN SO BADLY???!!
     
  4. Mr. Big Noodles

    Mr. Big Noodles Theory God

    Messages:
    5,089
    Likes Received:
    914
    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Agreement. It's a fun game, but playing online is a complete pain in the ass.
     
  5. Prydogga

    Prydogga Giddyup.

    Messages:
    7,280
    Likes Received:
    879
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Location:
    Apartment 5B, New York (Vic, Australia)
    I actually really enjoy that it's that stragetic, I feel there's so many games that discourage or make it hard to put any thought about how you should act against your enemy in a variety of situations, Starcraft is a great example of how carefully executed strategy actually does exist in gaming.
     
  6. Tomo009

    Tomo009 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    35
    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Location:
    Melton, VIC, Melbourne
    Yeah, I haven't played much in a while though. I was only a Platinum. Zerg player, I eventually got frustrated with how brain dead Protoss strategies seemed to be and it was taking so much for me to just survive the early game that my playing sort of petered out. I kind of want to really get back into it, but now it seems like a titanic task just to get back up to my platinum level haha. Will definitely try to get somewhat decent again before HoTS.
     
  7. Cadavuh

    Cadavuh Bounce The ....

    Messages:
    1,521
    Likes Received:
    388
    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    I am a now relapsed gamer because of this game. I bought sc2 the other day and have been playing and learning it religiously. I plan on becoming extremely efficient and good at it :D.


    lolwut?

    This seems like a significant achievement to me. I dont think that Protoss strategies are brain dead, they just dictate the direction of the game, as opposed to having to react to the other player's strategy, which is very characteristic of Zerg.
     
  8. SirMyghin

    SirMyghin The Dirt Guy Contributor

    Messages:
    7,873
    Likes Received:
    600
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Location:
    Anywhere but here.
    As far as strategies go, I found the 'counters' in SCII to be too much 'hard' counters, where when executed you destroy the army with little chance of failure (assuming equal level players). I prefer the more soft counter approach in RTS, where there is always a bit more of an out if you are crafty, the amount of circumstancial bonuses I think play a factor, they need to be deadened a bit imo.
     
  9. Asrial

    Asrial Whisper into nose

    Messages:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    167
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Vedbæk, Copenhagen, Denmark
    I got it, I liked it somewhat, but I can finally, after 10 years of on-and-off playing RTS-games in style with SCII, that it is not my preferred genre, even though it is very competitive. :shrug:
     
  10. groph

    groph SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,748
    Likes Received:
    404
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    TO HE WHO LOLWUTTED ME:

    This is why I said it's all tactics and no strategy. "Strategy" implies grand scale, a general battle plan. With a game like Starcraft, you have a small army on a small map and the units are designed with a rock-paper-scissors kind of counter system in mind.

    There is a little bit of leeway in terms of general strategy but really, if you have a plan in mind and scout your opponent, figuring out that he is doing a build that happens to hard counter yours, there goes your "strategy" since you can shift things on the fly with Starcraft and similar games. Compare that to Supreme Commander where you aren't playing a game that is an abstraction of a battle, you're playing a simulation of an actual battle. The maps are measured in kilometres (biggest is 81x81) and you can field up a 1,000 units. Army composition of course matters, but since the scale is so big you actually have to devise a grand strategy (like play defensively and tech up or play aggressively and do a land rush, sacrificing late game survivability). You employ full usage of land, sea, and air units, as well as stationary artillery pieces that take half an hour to build and can shoot all the way across the map. You get shield generators, massive powerplants that explode in nuclear fury, nuclear missiles, and behemoth experimental units that can single handedly crush entire land armies.

    It's not that Starcraft has absolutely zero strategy to it, it's just much much more focused on tactics (individual unit movement and positioning), micromanagement and force composition thanks to the hard counter system. I hate hard counter systems, makes the game almost entirely unenjoyable to me.
     
  11. Tomo009

    Tomo009 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    35
    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Location:
    Melton, VIC, Melbourne
    Of course it's competitive, that's part of the reason I DO like it. The fact that the races are all so different in gameplay yet there is a semblance of balance is pretty crazy.

    That said, Protoss always gave me headaches, pure blink stalker and stalker/colossus were just TOO strong against zerg, the only counter was to not let them get their army. Which as Zerg really wasn't easy. People really aren't kidding when they call it a 300 food army, add a few sentries and therefore the first bit of micro required by the Protoss and it became godlike.

    I understand that most of Protoss' attention has to go to base management as they have a lot of tasks to keep their production running optimally and early game force fielding can't be stress-free but it seems that the risk-reqard payoff late game was just ridiculous. Not unbeatable by any means but the Zerg player has a much, much tougher time in that encounter than the Protoss.

    Back when I was really playing, I would use Spanishiwa's style against Protoss because it would easily defend gate rushes and I would be so far ahead in economy against anything but a fast expanding Protoss that I didn't have to fear them too much. That is when the huge scale pressure and harassment game that I love begins.
     
  12. dacimvrl

    dacimvrl ss.org irRegular

    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    28
    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Starcraft II is amazing, teamplay..etc., too bad i can't play now :p
     
  13. SirMyghin

    SirMyghin The Dirt Guy Contributor

    Messages:
    7,873
    Likes Received:
    600
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Location:
    Anywhere but here.
    Shame SupCom never really caught on like the other RTSs (which are much simpler). I didn't do much online play as my friends didn't bother to play it, unfortunately. I really liked the scope it provided however.
     
  14. dacimvrl

    dacimvrl ss.org irRegular

    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    28
    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    LOLWUT..????!

    this just proves how ignorant you are and how little you have experienced SC2 MP..

    Strategy and tactics = 50/50 in SC2, if not more. There's something called the meta-game. And the way you devise a strategy is by scouting. You don't just shut your eyes and ears, and just blindly build 1000 units and send them to battle like you prefer. <- imho, that's pointless.

    With SC2, You have to scout, devise counters or attack plans, and surprise people. Strategy is huge, if you see your opponent teching, you have to make a conscious decision to attack/harass, out-expand, or tech. It's not as simple and ignorant as X build order > Y order like you mentioned. For instance, Huk's legendary Mothership Rush. It's not conventional, it's not an auto-win build order, cuz there ISN'T one.

    This is strategy, not just tactics by the way.
    &#x202a;SC2 MOTHERSHIP RUSH WAT?&#x202c;&rlm; - YouTube

    SC2 is also faster paced, so you could start with fast-expansion in mind, but you have to evolve your strategy constantly because you found holes in your opponent's strategy or the other way around. You don't just build whatever, select them all, and send them off hoping you have a bigger army and not having to worry about micro, or have some uber nuke that can single-handedly destroy your enemy, cuz that's not strategy, that's just plain mindless. (i spent 30min building an IWIN button; therefore i win?) *cough* did somebody mention that he hates hard counters? *cough*

    SC2 is a game for thinkers and strategists - you simply can't win by having the best micro in the game. Like what you said about Supreme Commander, you have to make the decisions to tech/defend, expand/defend, attack/harass, or even expand/harass or tech/harass based on scouting and a lot of times, terrain(high ground, low ground, distance, surprise backdoor, or hide expansions by building them far away from your naturals). And this happens constantly, whenever you engage, you modify your grand strategy cuz you have to evolve with the battlefield or you get left behind.

    In diamond league and above, we have to constantly mix up our builds and intentionally build buildings/unit that we have no intention of mass using and hide some buildings from enemy scouts just to fool our opponents(false expansion, warp gating, canaling...etc); and that is the meta-game of SC2. Thus why strategy is easily half the game in SC2.
     
  15. Tomo009

    Tomo009 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    35
    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Location:
    Melton, VIC, Melbourne
    You do that in all leagues haha. One of my personal favorites was to build a baneling nest in plain sight for the terran while secretly building a spire somewhere hidden. Usually got about 20ish SCV kills just from the first air raid.

    But they are sort of right in that your reactions to what you scout are sort of set in stone, there are a few paths to take usually, but they are very absolute. That's part of the reason Spanishiwa's build worked, it forced the opponent to either attempt to kill you (which is the wrong decision against that build) or macro hard and make sure you never take a third.
     
  16. ZEBOV

    ZEBOV Banned

    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    288
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Location:
    Suburbs of Memphis, TN
    I nuked my own team's SCV's last night, and then sent my SCV's to their mineral fields....
     
  17. groph

    groph SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,748
    Likes Received:
    404
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Yeah, totally prefer strategy games with no thought at all whatsoever. In no way do you ever build 1000 of any unit mindlessly.

    I'm also very aware of the existence of a metagame, I made mention of it before. I only meant that SC2 is too small of a scale for strategy in the grand strategy sense, strategy as if you were fighting an actual huge battle. Various builds are indeed called "strategies" but to me it seems that the game is "this counters that, that counters this" so you're pretty much forced to react to your opponent in a fairly few number of ways. I could be totally off, I mean I don't play SC2 but I have watched a ton of replays for shits. Debate me all you want. but Starcraft does not have "strategy" in the way bigger (physically bigger, not "more popular") RTS games like Supreme Commander have simply because the game operates on a tiny scale and the hard counter system combined with the ever-optimizing metagame kind of dictate how you're going to play anyway. With the SupCom games, you can stick to one general overarching plan for the entire game, unless of course you picked some kind of obvious mismatch to what your opponent is doing. Of course you still need to gather intelligence and react accordingly but there is much much more leeway in sticking to your end-game plan. You need to use what you do have out as best you can. I'll give Starcraft it's credit, you need freaky game knowledge to get good at it and navigating around that interface is a skill all on it's own especially when you use hotkeys, so it's the perfect competitive RTS. That kind of gameplay is to me, more like a sport than a game so it doesn't hold my interest. I love the huge scale of SupCom and the relative flexibility of it.

    @ whoever lamented about SupCom not catching on, I know. When it came out it pretty much stressed the hell out of the best systems so hardly anyone could even run it. The fastest quadcores of the time crapped out hopelessly trying to process the simulation, and I hear that the game was poorly written to begin with so the engine just ran like shit regardless of the hardware it was being played on. It was simply too ambitious but holy shit it had the potential to be the best game of all time ever. Supreme Commander 2 is a lot better optimized so it runs on most systems pretty well. This came at a cost though, the maps are nowhere near as big for the most part, there are much much less units, the experimentals are much easier to get out, and the economy/base management are far easier to master. It's like SupCom on a diet, and that pissed off a lot of people. I still love SupCom2 because you can still get into some seriously huge battles, most of the units in SupCom were useless anyway, and 81x81km maps are kind of unmanageably huge. When I do play, it's usually on the 20x20 maps.

    This thread surely isn't supposed to be us arguing over our own definitions of strategy and tactics, so feel free to continue with the "lolwut," I'm done. I understand that there are serious Starcraft experts out there, I am certainly not one of them.

    Back to Starcraft, I had some good fun with the use map settings games in Broodwar, and honestly I haven't even tried a single one in SC2 yet. I remember that really simple snipers game in BW that was played top to bottom, giving the player on top an unfair advantage because he could run behind trees easier. A friend of mine devised a simple solution - he made it play left to right and everyone thought he was a genius.

    Is there a SC2 version of Evolve or Zergling Blood?
     
  18. ZEBOV

    ZEBOV Banned

    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    288
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Location:
    Suburbs of Memphis, TN
    I've played Evolves on SC2. I enjoyed it.
     
  19. sentagoda

    sentagoda A serious man

    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Location:
    The frozen north Norway
    I love S C. The only thing I dont like is the horrible ranking system. Loved the single player aspect of the game as well.
     
  20. troyguitar

    troyguitar SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    780
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    Location:
    Corning, NY
    I haven't bought SC2 yet but I played SC1 all of the time with friends back in the day and again in 2004-2006. If it's anything at all like SC1, I'll love playing with friends and hate playing online. People online are just plain too good for it to be fun unless you spend as many hours as them to be that good too. I feel the same way about FPS'es. It's fun to get drunk and play with friends, not fun to get demolished by kids who play 40+ hours a week.

    Some of my most fun nights involved Red Bull + Vodka + playing StarCraft all night with a dozen or so people rotating in over the LAN - with everyone in the same room regardless of which team you were playing with. Scouting involved getting up and looking at your enemy's screen! :lol:
     

Share This Page