-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
StarCraft 2 Beta |OT| (Beta Now Reopen, GL HF)
- Thread starter Scrow
- Start date
NovemberMike
Member
ZealousD said:
Ghosts get extra damage vs zealots and marauders and marines with stim will win a fight against zealots pretty easily. Immortals aren't great against this either because they lose their shields and die in a single volley of fire from ten marauders.
EDIT: I'll also say that this is something I felt could be fought off before the immortal nerf because you had an extra immortal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba8n6JazZcg
I don't know if this has been posted yet but holy shit :lol
I don't know if this has been posted yet but holy shit :lol
GregLombardi
Member
I disagree.coamithra said:
The man who made that post is addressing something extremely important that Blizzard has definitely missed in Starcraft 2, and I will be posting something soon that tries to hit upon it as well. There is definitely a cohesion missing in Starcraft 2 that existed in Starcraft 1. But I'll leave my post for Blizzard themselves.
Is it correct to assume the wall off for Terran is THE most important first step when playing? Without that you are pretty much done for?
Played my first placement match last night and won.
One of the things I practiced during custom games several times was making sure I'd drop that first supply depot and then drop the barracks and then drop another supply at the same time. I think that's what saved my butt in this first game. A few minutes later I see a overlord come up to my ramp as my first marine pops out next time I see is a group of zerglings come up the ramp a minute later only for them to turn back. I think I still need to work on the multitasking though when it comes to controlling my army and still placing buildings or spending money. I try to switch back and forth but sometimes I forgot. I guess that will improve with practice.
The rush is why I never bothered with SC1 online. I hate it. If there could be some time limit before each side is able to move out I'd love it but not going to happen. So working to stop that was important I felt to learn first. I just need to work scouting so I don't have Protoss just appearing in my base. I really dislike Protoss. Had that happen in a practice game. Damn that was beyond annoying. Though I will take some fault in that as I didn't having anything near that ledge like I should have at the time it happen.
For this match I had planned on teching up to air but decided against it as soon as I dropped my factory. Instead just started pumping out marines, maruaders, and hellions. Grouped them together and then took off.
Which brings me to a question. Is it better to have diverse army groups or a lot of one unit mostly?
I would think having a mix would be better as then damage and taking damage is spread around. Not to mention having something that has splash damage. That's always how I've tried to play RTS with other games. Keeping units mixed. That was something that was something you had to do in Age of Empires and Kohan 2 (love this game but can't get it to play on Vista).
I've noticed watching some videos that some Terran players seem to not bother with air defense in the main bases. I don't get why. I would think having two or three turrets would be good defense and perhaps a bunker just in case something gets by. Especially when against Toss as they can send out observers and just stick one over your base. Then they scramble to do something but it's to late. Same with killing off Overlords and Pylons. I would think supply blocking the other side and depowering buildings would be good tactics or is that a waste of time and its better to go for the building and workers/drones/probes?
What are people feelings on there being a way to disrupt the Terran scan ability?
I'm focusing on Terran as I play but having the other sides stop it or at least make it incomplete would be interesting.
Played my first placement match last night and won.
One of the things I practiced during custom games several times was making sure I'd drop that first supply depot and then drop the barracks and then drop another supply at the same time. I think that's what saved my butt in this first game. A few minutes later I see a overlord come up to my ramp as my first marine pops out next time I see is a group of zerglings come up the ramp a minute later only for them to turn back. I think I still need to work on the multitasking though when it comes to controlling my army and still placing buildings or spending money. I try to switch back and forth but sometimes I forgot. I guess that will improve with practice.The rush is why I never bothered with SC1 online. I hate it. If there could be some time limit before each side is able to move out I'd love it but not going to happen. So working to stop that was important I felt to learn first. I just need to work scouting so I don't have Protoss just appearing in my base. I really dislike Protoss. Had that happen in a practice game. Damn that was beyond annoying. Though I will take some fault in that as I didn't having anything near that ledge like I should have at the time it happen.
For this match I had planned on teching up to air but decided against it as soon as I dropped my factory. Instead just started pumping out marines, maruaders, and hellions. Grouped them together and then took off.
Which brings me to a question. Is it better to have diverse army groups or a lot of one unit mostly?
I would think having a mix would be better as then damage and taking damage is spread around. Not to mention having something that has splash damage. That's always how I've tried to play RTS with other games. Keeping units mixed. That was something that was something you had to do in Age of Empires and Kohan 2 (love this game but can't get it to play on Vista).
I've noticed watching some videos that some Terran players seem to not bother with air defense in the main bases. I don't get why. I would think having two or three turrets would be good defense and perhaps a bunker just in case something gets by. Especially when against Toss as they can send out observers and just stick one over your base. Then they scramble to do something but it's to late. Same with killing off Overlords and Pylons. I would think supply blocking the other side and depowering buildings would be good tactics or is that a waste of time and its better to go for the building and workers/drones/probes?
What are people feelings on there being a way to disrupt the Terran scan ability?
I'm focusing on Terran as I play but having the other sides stop it or at least make it incomplete would be interesting.
Minsc
Gold Member
GregLombardi said:
Looks like a good read, I'm going to chug through it, but in all reality, by the time both expansions are out and the game is patched another 250 times, none of it will be relevant any more.
I'm sure StarCraft 1 had even more problems during its beta phase than that person discusses about StarCraft 2. It seems the premise of it is that all races have just a couple builds due to the lack of end game strategies due to changed micro/rules. There's no way that will stay true 3 years from now.
GregLombardi
Member
He's actually attacking the essence of engagement and how numbers matter so much as to make the game less appealing, if I had to rephrase his entire argument. But its tough to correctly collapse it when he says a lot of different things. Numbers have always mattered in Starcraft, but he's saying they could be overcome in the the past while that's less the case with SC2, which I agree with.Minsc said:
I would not be surprised at all if moving attack was due to a programming limitation because units responded automatically to commands and were independent of animation.
Basically, if they had programmed "gliding attack", no one would be complaining today about it.
Whether or not this is justification for adding moving attack is up for debate, I honestly don't care either way.
Silly mutas run in fear from my phoenixes.
Basically, if they had programmed "gliding attack", no one would be complaining today about it.
Whether or not this is justification for adding moving attack is up for debate, I honestly don't care either way.
Silly mutas run in fear from my phoenixes.
For all the people who have more invites and don't know what to do with them, I'm sure your fellow GAFers would love them, so here's the waiting list thread.
I'm still like 30 myself though, so I can only hope that list starts moving again.
I'm still like 30 myself though, so I can only hope that list starts moving again.
As a Protoss, what should I do against a Zerg that quick expands? I won't get enough Zealots to counter a bunch zerglings, and stalkers aren't particularly good against lings or the likely Roaches. Should I tech to Robotics, get one immortal, then a colossus, and pump stalkers if they are getting a spire?
Am I correct in understanding that even a 0/0/0 Colossus will pop 5 zerglings per shot? How do they fair as backup against roaches?
It feels like Toss should almost always get the ground weapon upgrades due to how many units benefit from them. Zealots, Stalkers, orby-thingys, Immortals, and Stalkers all get +2~+5 damage per upgrade, which seems to push them over the threshold in number of shots to kill.
Pre-BW Starcraft 1 was a bit of a mess with regards to balance, which is why all races got powerful anti-air tools. It was just too dominant without them (i.e. Guardians out-ranging missile towers and any other unit that could hit them)
Am I correct in understanding that even a 0/0/0 Colossus will pop 5 zerglings per shot? How do they fair as backup against roaches?
It feels like Toss should almost always get the ground weapon upgrades due to how many units benefit from them. Zealots, Stalkers, orby-thingys, Immortals, and Stalkers all get +2~+5 damage per upgrade, which seems to push them over the threshold in number of shots to kill.
Minsc said:
Pre-BW Starcraft 1 was a bit of a mess with regards to balance, which is why all races got powerful anti-air tools. It was just too dominant without them (i.e. Guardians out-ranging missile towers and any other unit that could hit them)
I just lost a close match against a Protoss player who was high up in the gold division, me being in Bronze and the pre-match said no-one was favoured. Curious.
Zealots with Charge are a pain for a bio-Terran build, throw in some stalkers to take out medivacs and that's game. I should've adapted quicker
Zealots with Charge are a pain for a bio-Terran build, throw in some stalkers to take out medivacs and that's game. I should've adapted quicker
Yaweee said:
I like to cannon rush their natural. they can't expand and I have a good place to start warping in my units. However, if they have fast lings, they might be able to run past the cannons but you should have some units to kill off the fast lings at your cannons, or a few cannons at your main to kill the lings. It is also important that you expand to your natural ASAP to get the Econ advantage. Expect zerg to try and rush to air once he sees he is cannon blocked, so be ready for that, but you shouldn't have a problem since you'll have an econ advantage. Also, once you are done expanding to your natural, you should get a couple void rays and phoenixes in order to supply block and also to scout out any nydus he might try doing to either mess up your main or expand.
With this tactic, it is important that you don't let him expand and he runs out of minerals at his main. If you can hold off whatever push he ends up coming out with, he will more than likely GG since he doesn't have any money left over.
Hope this helps
GregLombardi said:
Indeed. My first complaint would be the lack of proper defensive strategies. It's very difficult to defend yourself against a decent sized attack with the early resources provided for you. Even if "pro" players disagree, turtling and teching should always be a viable strategy.
GregLombardi
Member
What exactly is "turtling"? Moving from base to base? I'm confused by that term and I still haven't asked.ahoyhoy said:
ahoyhoy said:
I'd say it is only difficult for Zerg. The Terran wall-off is now standard practice, and Protoss can block their ramp pretty easily (a zealot in the way) with some stalkers or cannons backing it up.
If it were so hard to turtle and tech, then Void Ray or Banshee rushes would be nowhere near as common as they are now.
Sigh. Banished to Copper 2v2.
It's probably where I belong though, only now have I gotten the 5 win achievement. Decided to play as Zerg this time around as I was more of a Terran/Protoss player in SC1.
I don't want to blame my losses on my partner, but I swear I get paired up with total morons sometimes. I swear one was trying to build his base right beside an opponent's mineral field. One zealot took him out. Another built 5 barracks but had zero marines.
It's probably where I belong though, only now have I gotten the 5 win achievement. Decided to play as Zerg this time around as I was more of a Terran/Protoss player in SC1.
I don't want to blame my losses on my partner, but I swear I get paired up with total morons sometimes. I swear one was trying to build his base right beside an opponent's mineral field. One zealot took him out. Another built 5 barracks but had zero marines.
Yaweee said:
I have been having great luck with mass zealots, a few sentries, and HT. Storm simply messes up any sort of ground combination zerg plans to use. Get the zealot charge and its a GG.
Watched a replay last night of a game I had PvZ. Guy had about 17 roaches and 15 lings and I had 10 zealots, 2 sentries and 2 HT. Few good storms and barriers placements and I won only losing 3 zealots. Wasn't able to push through though as he had a ton of Spines up. Wasn't a problem when reinforcements arrived though.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
Yaweee said:
I agree. Terrans wall off easily, and Im having mild success with Protoss creating a walled choke tunnel using a gateway, a forge, and protected cannons behind them, and zealots in the tunnel. But with the zerg Im not bothering anymore, Im playing them as an open range mobile force, putting tentacles at each hive to slow down attacks and using my army to defend. I just havent been able to wall off at all with zerg.
Maybe this is why Im having the most fun with the zerg too. I really enjoy their macro game of queens and creep expansion.
coamithra said:
Agreed.
They want SC2 to be SC1, with a shitty engine that's easy to exploit to do stupid tricks you really shouldn't be able to do.
They can cry manbaby tears all day long while they play Broodwar.
Yaweee said:
Guardians outranging defensive shit is the way it was meant to be.
The Broodlord (new Guardians) is the same way.
And it's no coincidence that a Battlecruiser can Yamato a turret / spore crawler / cannon in one shot without being touched. Starcraft is a very offense-focused game.
Major Williams
Member
Got into an epic 1 hour 2v2 match last night.
2v2 Toss/Terran vs Toss/Terran
Carriers as always are super powerful.... geez. We almost got wiped out, but Stalkers' blinking scared them away.
Both terran went MMM, but ultimately my partner rethought his strat into jetpack marines, anti-air ships, and battlecruisers.
I went from Stalker/Colossus/Immortal to Stalker/High Templar/Phoenix to Carrier/Mothership/Stalker.
The other guys kept building MMM, Thors, Siege tanks, and Carriers out the yin yang. Carriers are a HUGE threat in large numbers, nearly impossible to take down 15+ Carriers at once without a full anti-air force. That's why I had to build 15 Carriers to combat his 20+ at the end of the game.
2v2 Toss/Terran vs Toss/Terran
Carriers as always are super powerful.... geez. We almost got wiped out, but Stalkers' blinking scared them away.
Both terran went MMM, but ultimately my partner rethought his strat into jetpack marines, anti-air ships, and battlecruisers.
I went from Stalker/Colossus/Immortal to Stalker/High Templar/Phoenix to Carrier/Mothership/Stalker.
The other guys kept building MMM, Thors, Siege tanks, and Carriers out the yin yang. Carriers are a HUGE threat in large numbers, nearly impossible to take down 15+ Carriers at once without a full anti-air force. That's why I had to build 15 Carriers to combat his 20+ at the end of the game.
TurtleSnatcher
Member
Major Williams said:
For Toss carriers can be annoyingly hard. Storm works wonders on them.. as well as a Mothership vortex to split the group with Stalkers and well placed blinks... chunks up front blinking behind after initial attack then keep rotating.
For Terran - Mass Vikings are good vs Carriers - They have good range. Thors arent bad due to splash. Also BCs are nice and ghosts with EMP.
For Zerg - Corrupters are awesome agst massive units.
The Lamonster
Member
Go ahead and play, there are no story elements in the beta.IPoopStandingUp said:
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Mudkips said:
Exploits? Have you ever seen a high level match of Starcraft played? It can look almost like a different game is being played when two players with amazing micro skills are matched against each other. The virtual lack of a ceiling on what is possible is what made Starcraft into an e-sport and what caused it to gather such a following. Without such a deep micro game, it all comes down to a simple rock-paper-scissors type of game where the person with best build order and best timing wins. It needs to be possible for a weaker group of forces to take out a stronger one given enough micro management skill. The competitive scene will be severely damaged without this element.
Besides, how does it make sense that units, especially flying units, become less mobile as technology advances?
GregLombardi
Member
Zefah said:
are you saying it doesn't make sense because its less realistic, or that it doesn't make sense because within the context of Starcraft 2 its more expensive to get less mobile units?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
GregLombardi said:
That last comment was more from a lore perspective. Why are units suddenly unable to do things that they used to be able to do? Also I just don't see why, after streamlining the interface and giving the player more control over the macro game, that Blizzard thought it would be a good idea to take away some control from the micro game.
GregLombardi
Member
Well I think we have to be clear what we're talking about here.Zefah said:
So yeah I guess that lore comment makes sense.
But when you say macro and micro, you guys are specifically talking about the ability to perform actions with individual units, or with individual groups of units with the same abilities, actions which would outclass a stronger force, correct?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
GregLombardi said:
When I talk about macro I am speaking more to the player's overall strategy, managing the economy, building stuff, getting tech upgrades, etc... Interface improvements, such as being able to select multiple buildings at once and set relay points directly onto minerals, effectively improved control on this part of the game and made the macro game a bit less busy.
When I'm talking about micro I am referring to the player's control of their units whether individually or in a group. Smart movement of one's units is always important in an RTS and being able to multitask multiple groups and types of units to attack your opponent or defend your assets is what tends to set players apart.
I read that thread yesterday and it's very exclusionary. Just look at this.
Putting someone like Dustin Browder in charge of development for SC2 though, is almost like letting one of the many overly-enthuasiastic-and-overly-optimistic TL forum resident D- noobs have the last say about what is good and bad for a multi million dollar game. Sure those crazy (slightly delusional) threads about the viability of some obscure unit or strategy can be fun to read from time to time. But in the end it's always reassuring to have that old veteran come in, one of those fountains of cynicism, to tell you what will work and what won't. What's realistic and what's not. Where your focus should rather lie instead of wasting your time with things might be awesome but don't work in reality. I feel that Blizzard desperately needed but lacked one of those voices in the development of SC2. The passion is there no doubt, but there needs to be a voice of reason behind it all.
Basically the pros are the old vets and everyone else are D-noobs, including Dusting Browder. That lack of respect for both the casual player and the developer is just disgusting. I'm going to have trust that Blizzard knows more about what is good and bad for a multi million dollar game because they've made one before.
Putting someone like Dustin Browder in charge of development for SC2 though, is almost like letting one of the many overly-enthuasiastic-and-overly-optimistic TL forum resident D- noobs have the last say about what is good and bad for a multi million dollar game. Sure those crazy (slightly delusional) threads about the viability of some obscure unit or strategy can be fun to read from time to time. But in the end it's always reassuring to have that old veteran come in, one of those fountains of cynicism, to tell you what will work and what won't. What's realistic and what's not. Where your focus should rather lie instead of wasting your time with things might be awesome but don't work in reality. I feel that Blizzard desperately needed but lacked one of those voices in the development of SC2. The passion is there no doubt, but there needs to be a voice of reason behind it all.
Basically the pros are the old vets and everyone else are D-noobs, including Dusting Browder. That lack of respect for both the casual player and the developer is just disgusting. I'm going to have trust that Blizzard knows more about what is good and bad for a multi million dollar game because they've made one before.
NovemberMike
Member
Halycon said:
IIRC the control he's talking about requires essentially glitching the game with patrol and stop.