4 ms·

Re: StarCraft 2, I think it's a shame that playing at lower speeds never really caught on. Both SC1 and SC2 have (or at least had?) options like "normal", faste

Re: StarCraft 2, I think it's a shame that playing at lower speeds never really caught on. Both SC1 and SC2 have (or at least had?) options like "normal", faster, and fastest speed, but the community normalized on the highest speed as the standard, where mechanical skill is much more important to winning, and you don't get much time to plan anything.

guenthert 4y ago
You plan ahead of time. Of course, no plan survives contact with the opponent and then you improvise. There is, as you correctly observed, no time for conscious thinking then. It's all 'muscle memory' so to speak. Hence you won't be competitive until you have played thousands of games. The match-making algorithm ensures that you win ~50% of the times, unless you're at either extreme of the skill level. Every so often (or quite often) you're matched with a vastly superior opponent and blasted to pieces, but it's already much better than SC1 w/o such match-making, where beginners never saw the light. Also Blizzard has a good handle on cheating in SC2 (unlike SC1).
trinovantes 4y ago
The early game on normal speed is insanely boring but mid/late game on fastest can be overwhelming I think it's a bit of a shame Archon mode (2v2 but 2 players control a single "player") never took off and eventually got cancelled
- WJW 4y ago
  Archon mode still exists though, for example Harstem (SC2 pro/streamer) posted a video of a 3vs3 with some of the best players in the world just 2 days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eThKoRNB6Wc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eThKoRNB6Wc You're right that the archon ladder is a shadow of the 1v1 ladder though.
spywaregorilla 4y ago
Optimal play doesn't really involve much novel planning unless you're an absolute god at the game. Until then you're likely to see more improvement just improving your execution... which sucks
- WJW 4y ago
  That is how most sports are. There's not all that much strategy involved in amateur league tennis or football either, execution rules supreme. I don't think you can separate out execution from strategy unless you explicitly separate out the time pressure, such as in (non-bullet/blitz) chess. But RTS without the RT part is a very different game.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Yeah, it's not that it's unique or anything. But the S is supposed to be the value prop of the RTS genre. Most people are fine with the focus being on execution for sports and FPS and what not.
    - d1sxeyes 4y ago
      Well compare and contrast with turn-based strategy games like Civilisation - I don't think the S is the value proposition per se. I think the combination of RT + S is what drives people to the genre. There are plenty of excellent turn-based strategy games where time pressure is effectively removed, and only the planning component is important. I'd recommend turn-based strategy for anyone who is not particularly interested in the execution part.
  - Blozvez 4y ago
    [dead]
  - Regardozz 4y ago
    Well, that's for the amateur sports, but I can tell you that if we're talking about professional sports where players are way more skilled, the strategy there plays a huge role. I didn't understand that before I started keeping track of the sports with http://www.televisionet.tv/ http://www.televisionet.tv/ , but at the same time, it's pretty obvious that execution rules supreme anyway, there's no doubt

guenthert 4y ago

You plan ahead of time. Of course, no plan survives contact with the opponent and then you improvise. There is, as you correctly observed, no time for conscious thinking then. It's all 'muscle memory' so to speak. Hence you won't be competitive until you have played thousands of games. The match-making algorithm ensures that you win ~50% of the times, unless you're at either extreme of the skill level. Every so often (or quite often) you're matched with a vastly superior opponent and blasted to pieces, but it's already much better than SC1 w/o such match-making, where beginners never saw the light. Also Blizzard has a good handle on cheating in SC2 (unlike SC1).

trinovantes 4y ago

The early game on normal speed is insanely boring but mid/late game on fastest can be overwhelming I think it's a bit of a shame Archon mode (2v2 but 2 players control a single "player") never took off and eventually got cancelled

WJW 4y ago
Archon mode still exists though, for example Harstem (SC2 pro/streamer) posted a video of a 3vs3 with some of the best players in the world just 2 days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eThKoRNB6Wc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eThKoRNB6Wc You're right that the archon ladder is a shadow of the 1v1 ladder though.

spywaregorilla 4y ago

Optimal play doesn't really involve much novel planning unless you're an absolute god at the game. Until then you're likely to see more improvement just improving your execution... which sucks

WJW 4y ago
That is how most sports are. There's not all that much strategy involved in amateur league tennis or football either, execution rules supreme. I don't think you can separate out execution from strategy unless you explicitly separate out the time pressure, such as in (non-bullet/blitz) chess. But RTS without the RT part is a very different game.
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Yeah, it's not that it's unique or anything. But the S is supposed to be the value prop of the RTS genre. Most people are fine with the focus being on execution for sports and FPS and what not.
  - d1sxeyes 4y ago
    Well compare and contrast with turn-based strategy games like Civilisation - I don't think the S is the value proposition per se. I think the combination of RT + S is what drives people to the genre. There are plenty of excellent turn-based strategy games where time pressure is effectively removed, and only the planning component is important. I'd recommend turn-based strategy for anyone who is not particularly interested in the execution part.
- Blozvez 4y ago
  [dead]
- Regardozz 4y ago
  Well, that's for the amateur sports, but I can tell you that if we're talking about professional sports where players are way more skilled, the strategy there plays a huge role. I didn't understand that before I started keeping track of the sports with http://www.televisionet.tv/ http://www.televisionet.tv/ , but at the same time, it's pretty obvious that execution rules supreme anyway, there's no doubt