• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

My foray into Starcraft2

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Nechen

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
First let me start by saying that this is not intended to start a flame war or an unending debate on what needs to be balanced or remove from the game, just a log of my personal experiences and why Starcraft has been ruined for me. I will say that I remember when I first got Starcraft and how many hours me and my friends wasted on comp stomps.

I've always enjoyed Starcraft, three well rounded races and a game that was able to accomplish what Games Workshop never could .... a fun RTS.

That being said, when I moved on from the Wings of Liberty Campaign me and my friend took to 2v2 which we achieved Platinum in (but it wasn't really that hard.) Given our schedules I decided to try my hand at 1v1. Figured it would help me improve my macro, micro, APM, and whatever else have you ... I was wrong.

Let me also state that SC2 seems to have incorporated A LOT of elements from World of Warcraft in the sense of achieving and grinding. Ladder climbing and game winning seemed to create an endorphin rush and I became eerily aware that it was the same rush I felt in Battlegrounds in WoW when I was a teenager. I was never addicted to WoW per se but I know every psychological aspect behind Blizzard's design.

As of right now I have 90 wins and keep fluctuating from 450 points to 550 points in Silver and floating between Rank 1 and 3.

The way this game seems to work is a very simple mechanic of "Oh you've had a winning streak, time to throw you up against gold and if you beat him then we'll do Platinum ETC..." until I prove to Blizzard's bizarre sentient life form that I am worthy of a promotion. Since I've not achieved gold given how many games I've won and that I'm roughly on a 1:1 W/L I'm a tad bitter.

I just finished my last and final game of SC2 because I no longer enjoy the soaring anger and rushes of adrenaline associated with winning or losing. I play Terran all the way and have mastered everyone from 1-1-1 to 6rax all in to proxy attacks to 3rax stim to everything else you could possibly imagine, all with mixed results.

I've come to notice in this game that in the early leagues you either rush and win or lose and try again until gold and platinum, upon which they turn into 35 minute macro games and whoever has the largest army and responds better wins.

In my opinion I don't feel SC2 is very strategic and is more about reflexes and APMs (and maybe mouse clicks) above anything else. Sure micro is a part of it but when I've got 200/200 consisting of Marines/Maruaders/Ghosts/Medivacs/Tanks and he's got a ton of Zealots and High Templar, we kind of SMOOSH together in the middle. I shoot EMP rounds at his deathball and he storms my bionic steamroller. Whoever comes out ahead is the victor and proceeds on to the enemies base.

This game is just that, its a game of who can macro better in the higher leagues and who can rush better in the lower leagues and if you do this enough times you get promoted so you can run the same process over again. This game is not innately complicated or complex, there's just too many different avenues that you have to learn to predict.

I'm rather sad that I'm no longer able to enjoy this game, I found it much faster than DoW and SupCom and a lot more responsive and enjoyable to play but 1v1 has really ruined it for me. I've lost too many marines and buildings to mass banelings and too many workers to banshees and Dark Templars.

I could drone on about balance issues and so forth but I really don't see the point, you get a certain number of combinations for winning with your chosen race and you just have to be lucky enough to scout early and take a gamble on what he's going to build.

Does anyone else here agree with me on this? Remember I'm not discussing balance issues, but the very flawed nature of this game in of itself.
 
I will start by saying I feel your pain but disagree with the cause. But I do love sc2. I havent played in a while but that is time constraints (only get to play ~2 hours a week atm and there a lot of games out there I want to play)

I feel sc2 is incredably balanced. I was diamond 2v2 with my brother and as you say, it is relatively easy. As soon as you throw in chatting over skype you become like 1 player and most enemies below platinum cant cope with your organisation and you can place yourself to get 2v1 situations. 2v2 against other non-random teams gets incredably fun :) (2v2 was my favorite match up) building armies that compliment each other while both harrassing either toghether or opposite sides of the map. the number of strategies are endless.

onto 1v1. This definately pushed my game. This is also the 1st game that I felt bad at! For the past 10 years I have been online gaming. and apart from when I first started most games I have felt like an '1337' player. Blitzing every player I met, and only occasionally meeting someone better.

Bring along blizzards ladders and match making and the degree to which the skill goes up to. I initially placed in gold (this was after just mincing the single player campaign on brutal and doing all achivements along the way) knowing that plat and diamond were above me was disheartening. I expected to be platinum level. Little did I know I wasn't even close. Quikly being demoted to silver. I then I had to work up again.
but I would take my hat off to their system although I sometimes felt I should be promoted long before I actually did they did consistantly keep me around 60% win ratio. Which might not make me feel '1337' but it does give me the highs and the lows and keeps me challenged and interested.

I have played against all levels of players (well I have to admit, never masters league level) and it is a very different game at each level. Your complaints seem to be that lower levels is a rush and higher ranks being macro. There is a simple reason for this. If you dont learn a solid macro technique then you will not progress beyond a certain point.

Macro is the key to the basics of sc2. In the lower leagues people haven't learnt this yet so rely on surprising the enemy with rush tactics, which because your enemy is also low ranked, work. So they try it again and again. They might even rank up, and therfore feel they have the game mastered.

But if you try any of the rush tactics at a higher level, you will get squashed very quickly. Every rush tactic is very simply countered and doesnt even require much change from your macro build.

So long as you learn to spot and counter the rushes you can be running off of 3 bases while your enemy is just putting down their second. Allowing you just to roll over them.

I felt it was around platinum level where macro skills werent quite enough to win any more, you also had to use your units profficiently. Up until platinum I found you could even counter banelings but just pumping masses of marines onto them (eventually they use to run out :) ) past a point in the ladders though, not a chance!

I am also a terran at heart. I can easily say that every game I lost I got out played, or made a mistake I can point to. I never felt I lost for any other reason than I wasnt good enough to win that game! which is rare experience in modern day gaming!

All in all I feel it is a very balanced game that is extremely competative. I wouldnt recomend it if you want to feel '1337' though (unless you really are pro level which tbh, very few of us are :) ) Load up some call of duty for that and launch a nuke or 2 :)
 
I appreciate the feedback that you have for the game, but I don't feel like there is a problem as you stated. I think firey really got the point across in saying that ultimately the game is about economy and map control. Micro is important at a high level, but ultimately if you have a better economy and use the advantages that you have gone for (army size, economy, tech being the main 3) you can try to tilt the balance in your favor. I honestly have played probably all of 10 matches in 1v1 [placed into Platinum] (I personally just prefer to watch pro matches on Day9 or their livestreams on teamliquid, it's just a lot more fun and less stressful). But while watching these matches [granted they are all diamond + level players] the game takes on a different shape/method of play.

Firey nailed it on the head saying that Bronze/Silver will be full of people that found out how to do 1 or 2 openings to get units out quickly to get them over to the other base and try to win in 10 minutes or less. Once you get to a higher level the meta for the game changes, strategies become more important and scouting/map control turns the tide of the game under most circumstances. I would say that if you are stuck not getting into gold I think you need to go back and watch replays to find out what you could have done better to learn from mistakes.
 
Oh I agree whole heartadly. The match making system makes perfect sense and I improve with every game I play.

What I mean to say is that I realized last night that SC2 is a grind in its own way. The strategy is nowhere near as deep as other less popular RTSs.

It just seems to be a game of memorization and reflex. Hence BOs and APM...
 
I think that BOs are going to be in every game, but I think the strategy goes way past a BO in higher level games that involve scouting, taking the information that you see (gas-heavy, early expand, air, etc) and then changing your strategy based on the information that you can assess and not guess.

APM is somewhat important, but I really don't think it matters except for maybe in diamond or masters+ level play. I'm pretty sure if a person knows what they are doing, knows good army compositions, and how to macro they will be winning most of their games even if they are only at (for example) 100APM vs 300APM like the pros do. The same way that you can play baseball for a long time, even if you can't hit a 98MPH fast ball, or can't dunk a basketball.

For any argument against there being not much strategy I highly recommend watching some of the casted professional/high-level games by Day9/Husky/etc, it gives an entirely different view on how the game is play and the mind-games that can be done instead of it just being medieval warfare of two armies going head to head and the bigger army winning.
 
Nechen I think this was well written and I agree with your thoughts on Starcraft completely. I don't play it very much any more for the same reasons. I actually made it to gold at one point and you're right it is exactly the way you describe it.
 
I think that BOs are going to be in every game, but I think the strategy goes way past a BO in higher level games that involve scouting, taking the information that you see (gas-heavy, early expand, air, etc) and then changing your strategy based on the information that you can assess and not guess.

APM is somewhat important, but I really don't think it matters except for maybe in diamond or masters+ level play. I'm pretty sure if a person knows what they are doing, knows good army compositions, and how to macro they will be winning most of their games even if they are only at (for example) 100APM vs 300APM like the pros do. The same way that you can play baseball for a long time, even if you can't hit a 98MPH fast ball, or can't dunk a basketball.

For any argument against there being not much strategy I highly recommend watching some of the casted professional/high-level games by Day9/Husky/etc, it gives an entirely different view on how the game is play and the mind-games that can be done instead of it just being medieval warfare of two armies going head to head and the bigger army winning.

I probably can't describe how much I can't bring myself to care about what Day9 and others can do when they fight eachother. That's like saying you enjoy playing basketball because its fun to watch pro NBA teams on TV ... it makes no sense.

If anything the only people who watch professional sports are those who will never play professionally themselves. Ill never be on the same level as Day9 and others so why would I give a **** what the game is like for them?

This game is designed for the top 1% and I shudder to think how frightening it is on the S Korean side of things.
 
there is a ton of strategy in SC2, this is not an insult, but you just never reached a level to use it, if you cannot hold and macro through a silver level rush your pretty mediocre at the game, and thats ok, i suck as COD and BF3, im OK (high gold - high plat) at SC2.... economy is big, no argument because even if you counter me perfectly (Say tanks Vs Lings) if i have a $h1t ton of lings i can win eventually.... but i have beat better players because of good strategy's, tech switch, drops, expanding hard, turtling, map control, hit and run, upgrades....

I have also lost to these strategies at one point or another.... information is king in SC2 next to economy.... yes APM, micro, macro go into it for sure.... and can swing a close game.... but what RTS does not have alll those as factors and has a bigger strategy component, id like to try it....
 
I'd have to agree with you. However all the components you just listed have to do with speed, not strategy. Its just a tug of war game, watch any TvT livestream and you'll see what I mean
 
Day9 is mostly just a commentator of starcraft games Here's his site. He has a daily show (called the Day9 Daily) where he goes over tips and tricks of how to play better. He's definitely one of my favorite internet personalities and has done more for starcraft than pretty much anyone else in helping it stay popular. If you haven't watched any of his dailies I think you are doing yourself a disservice, as I find him to be pretty humorous and insightful.

most esports-level games are balanced around high level play. Do you really think it matters to the average player when Blizzard increases fireball's crit modifier by .5%? Not really, even though they will complain about it being too much or too little despite not playing at a level where it matters. Or another example is if DICE raises bullet damage by 2 on a machine gun, etc.

That's like saying you enjoy playing basketball because its fun to watch pro NBA teams on TV ... it makes no sense.

That isn't what I was saying/meant. What I am trying to say is that I enjoy watching professional players (of any sport/esport that I am interested in) as I can learn or aspire to be able to do what they do. I enjoy playing games after watching higher level players play as it provides me with a stepping stone to learn things that I hadn't before. It's the same way that I learned how to Concussion Grenade Jump and bunny hop playing Team Fortress Classic a decade ago, I never would have learned how to do it had I not watched some of the higher level players videos
 
Last edited:
Right that's my point. This game is designed for e-sport players.
 
It's hard to enjoy the game for a long period of time playing random 1v1s by yourself. Join a team or play with some friends over voice chat and it becomes way more fun. That goes for any game, though.
 
That was the point I made in the beginning of this thread.

Also, team playis admitted by Blizzard to be nowhere near balanced. I'm talking more about 1v1
 
How would you design this game (or any game) differently to keep it balanced if it isn't balanced around esports-level?

You can't.
 
My post may appear condescending, but is not intended as such. Only being matter of fact.

I've always enjoyed Starcraft, three well rounded races and a game that was able to accomplish what Games Workshop never could .... a fun RTS.

On this we agree.

That being said, when I moved on from the Wings of Liberty Campaign me and my friend took to 2v2 which we achieved Platinum in (but it wasn't really that hard.) Given our schedules I decided to try my hand at 1v1. Figured it would help me improve my macro, micro, APM, and whatever else have you ... I was wrong.

If it didn't help you, you weren't learning to play the game as you played it. You were just pressing keys and hoping for a result. So you were right in that you were wrong, but only because you didn't do it right. If you weren't learning from your mistakes or looking for how to fix something that goes wrong, you weren't playing or learning right.

Let me also state that SC2 seems to have incorporated A LOT of elements from World of Warcraft in the sense of achieving and grinding. Ladder climbing and game winning seemed to create an endorphin rush and I became eerily aware that it was the same rush I felt in Battlegrounds in WoW when I was a teenager. I was never addicted to WoW per se but I know every psychological aspect behind Blizzard's design.

Winning a game feels good no matter what game you're playing. The only thing they pulled over from WoW is the crap chat and achievements.

As of right now I have 90 wins and keep fluctuating from 450 points to 550 points in Silver and floating between Rank 1 and 3.
Okay, you can't really have an opinion on the game mechanics or how it's played at silver league.
The way this game seems to work is a very simple mechanic of "Oh you've had a winning streak, time to throw you up against gold and if you beat him then we'll do Platinum ETC..." until I prove to Blizzard's bizarre sentient life form that I am worthy of a promotion. Since I've not achieved gold given how many games I've won and that I'm roughly on a 1:1 W/L I'm a tad bitter.
That's how it's supposed to be. If you're stomping on bronze kids, you play silver, and if you beat silver, you get gold opponents. Right now I'm plat with 90% diamond opponents. Promotion will come soon since I'm beating a great deal of them.
I just finished my last and final game of SC2 because I no longer enjoy the soaring anger and rushes of adrenaline associated with winning or losing. I play Terran all the way and have mastered everyone from 1-1-1 to 6rax all in to proxy attacks to 3rax stim to everything else you could possibly imagine, all with mixed results.

If you're getting mad it's because you are not controlling your experience well enough. If you got mixed results with 1/1/1, you definitely didn't do it right. It's one of the most powerful builds all the way up to grand master.

I've come to notice in this game that in the early leagues you either rush and win or lose and try again until gold and platinum, upon which they turn into 35 minute macro games and whoever has the largest army and responds better wins.

Most of my games at high plat low diamond level end at about 15 minutes.

In my opinion I don't feel SC2 is very strategic and is more about reflexes and APMs (and maybe mouse clicks) above anything else. Sure micro is a part of it but when I've got 200/200 consisting of Marines/Maruaders/Ghosts/Medivacs/Tanks and he's got a ton of Zealots and High Templar, we kind of SMOOSH together in the middle. I shoot EMP rounds at his deathball and he storms my bionic steamroller. Whoever comes out ahead is the victor and proceeds on to the enemies base.
This game is just that, its a game of who can macro better in the higher leagues and who can rush better in the lower leagues and if you do this enough times you get promoted so you can run the same process over again. This game is not innately complicated or complex, there's just too many different avenues that you have to learn to predict.

It's not strategic because everyone's terrible in silver league. There's no strategy, it's just whoever can pump out more units. When you get higher up the strategy starts to come out.

I'm rather sad that I'm no longer able to enjoy this game, I found it much faster than DoW and SupCom and a lot more responsive and enjoyable to play but 1v1 has really ruined it for me. I've lost too many marines and buildings to mass banelings and too many workers to banshees and Dark Templars.
Learn to marine split? Learn to build detection? You're QQing about valid parts of the game that YOU can fix by learning to play the game better. Simple fact of the matter: you should scout more. Then you'll see a DT harrass or banshee harass coming. Plain and simple. If you see a tech lab on a starport or a dark shrine, you can respond before it happens and simply win. Hell, with dt's, you can actually kill them without detection with GOOD tank micro. (target fire units that the DT's are attacking, and the splash will damage the DT).

Basically, find solutions to your problems. I LAUGH MANIACALLY when my opponent goes banshees, because it will ALWAYS backfire because I will always be prepared for it. Banshees also have this nice little trait about them in regards to delaying any kind of army or tech production. banshees are time consuming, and expensive. If you see banshees, you can probably all in and win the game right then and there if you're producing units.

I could drone on about balance issues and so forth but I really don't see the point, you get a certain number of combinations for winning with your chosen race and you just have to be lucky enough to scout early and take a gamble on what he's going to build.
There are very few balance issues you have the skill to identify. I promise you.
Does anyone else here agree with me on this? Remember I'm not discussing balance issues, but the very flawed nature of this game in of itself.

I disagree whole heartedly. You should give it another go, and get some higher level friends who can coach you out of that silver level rut. :\
 
Last edited:
I'd have to agree with you. However all the components you just listed have to do with speed, not strategy. Its just a tug of war game, watch any TvT livestream and you'll see what I mean

So again i ask, what rts is better.... and there is strategy, punishing an early expand, scouting, countering, knowing when to attack or when to pull back... i think your confusing the fact that doing this faster is good but doing the wrong things fast wont help any either....

I don;t mean to be MEAN, but i also think your commenting on a game your just not very good at and trying to give an in depth and detailed analysis.... and i dont think you (or i for that matter) are qualified....

Just cause your nto good at a game does not mean there is no strategy.... it means YOU haventFigured OUT the strategy that works in each situation...
 
That was the point I made in the beginning of this thread.

Also, team playis admitted by Blizzard to be nowhere near balanced. I'm talking more about 1v1
I was talking about 1v1. There are a lot of competitive and casual teams alike who just 1v1, practice with each other, etc.
 
Oh I'm not denying that I'm a n00b at this. My friend who is in plat informed me that a 1:1 w/l is normal, if so how am I supposed to learn and progress if the game just throws me up against players who are just better than me?
 
i think your just not seeing what everyone else is telling you, in the medical world it is wolfes law aka; specific adaptations to imposed demands...

If all you ever lift is 100lbs, even if you can lift it 100 times, you will never get strong enough to bench 200lbs

If all you ever run is 8 minute miles, even if you can run 10 in a row, you will never run a single 5 minute mile

If all you ever do is play COD on easy, no matter how many times you beat it, you will never be good @ hard

If all you ever do is what you KNOW hoe to do, no matter how many times you do, you will never learn something new....

If all you ever do is play silver level players, even if you have a 100% w/l ratio, you will never become a gold level player, or plat, or diamond....

We as a species do not get better by doing what we know we can do, we get better buy pushing out of our comfort zone and learning from failures. Delta force has a phrase: Most people train to perfection, delta trains until to failure...." that way they KNOW their limitations and constantly push into and (hopefully) past them to become better....

Watch your replays, post them here when you lose, figure out WHY you lose, learn form it and get better... if you just dont LIKE the game i wont argue with you, it is NOT for everyone and there are PLENTY of games I am not good at or don't like, but your logic that because YOU arent improving THE GAME is to blame is flawed and immature....

either give it up cause you dont like it, or swallow your hurt pride, and begin working to get better, i bet i could pick out 10 things in one of your games that would help you win, and, if you would like, i will be MORE than happy too, it helps, and I GET BETTER in helping YOU GET BETTER, i have had it done for me and I GOT BETTER.... but you gotta want it...
 
Exactly what bigben said. The playing against higher level players and learning from mistakes is what will make you better and get you playing against better people. I could join 'noob' servers in FPS games and rack up #1 on the scoreboard 9/10 times, but that doesn't make me any better at it if I only beat up on people that are worse than I am.
 
Back