“there is no strategy except to abuse better multitasking and when you have two players spamming APM at each other it’s just pure luck who makes the first mistake.”
Such a bold statement, but I really don’t agree there. A lot of fights in this game are not based on luck at all. Let’s go to the micro part which can be a strategy in itself. There’s so many possibilities and strategies when you control your units and that can change the tide in itself, not by the control itself but by where you move them around the entire map and what you’re trying to create with them. That’s only the bigger part. The rest is direct engagements like I said and we know there’s at least some strategy there.
Also, even if with pro apm, you can miss some stuff (drops, hidden stuff, it could be anything), but is it more they should have prevented their mistake so, more strategy there or is it impossible to cover them all because we’re limited by what our brain can do. The fun part is, we’re both humans so it’s always fair. It goes both sides. If you watch lower level games, there’s even some sense of strategy there, it’s not efficient, and there’s not a lot of stuff involved because the macro is complete garbage but still, there’s some semblance of it.
You’re slightly right though, APM really is a big factor. There’s no denying it but there’s a lot of other weaknesses as well.
My point for this still thread is still here though, and it was mostly for game balance. I feel like the game from a balance standpoint (units, races) are balanced. If there’s an offense there’s probably a defense assuming the players are equal and the fights are not impossible. (too low numbers of units, 2 armies with one that counters the other completely by having binary units ex: roach vs banshee only but that’s certainly not how real games play out but, you can carefully and appropriately choose your unit comp and if you choose the wrong one, that’s on you).
A stronger multitasker will be forcing 5 of these fights at the same time and will be pushing you so hard at literally every second of the game that you can’t focus on anything else.
In chess, the magnitude of mistakes correlates inversely with turn length. When the timer runs out, mistakes go through the roof. People simply don’t have enough time to think about their moves when the clock gets below 30 seconds. In SC2, these decisions have to be made hundreds of times faster than that. The typical pro player APM is roughly 500, which is 8 actions per second. That would be like making a move in chess every 0.1 seconds. SC2 plays out literally 240x faster than the point where chess becomes random.
If you think decision making / strategy / tactics can exist on these time scales, you are living in a fantasy world. Mistakes happen randomly and their outcomes are effectively random, and SC2 forces players to make moves on time scales when mistakes are guaranteed. The outcome of SC2 is highly random, which is why the best player in SC2 has a peak win-rate of 70% – not even he can overcome the randomness to provide a more stable win-rate.
SC2 is “played” in the same sense that a piano is “played”. People are hammering out memorized actions like notes in a song - the first player to play the wrong note loses. There is zero strategy in this game as it exists in its current form.
I mean, that’s why I said assuming players are equal which is how it should be. (mmr, pro games)
I certainly can’t do it (yet… who knows?) a lot of people can try to push their limits to their level or more if they really want to and are not limited by an external factor.
It’s not as clear cut as chess, though. You can compare them but that’s useless. It’s just a different game.
Why? Like you said it is random. But the APM, strategies and essential skills can force that randomness to go down by a lot. I know what you’re trying to say, but that’s just because we can’t handle it, I’m talking perfect level AI here. I can’t say I don’t admire the pros though. The game is still very good with our limits that are very high but not perfect, it’s just something that we have to accept.
The devs basically shot themselves in the foot with the skill ceiling, which is only favorable to Korean pros who are getting paid.
To succeed, the devs have to decide: is this a micro game, or a macro game? I would hope it’s a macro game. Micro games are basically for kids.
I would actually hope that it becomes a strategy game. But that would take alot of work. You would need to hire more talented developers. And honestly this games future is iffy. We can pray. I won’t be mean.
Why is it not a strategy you say? Well, it has already been said. It’s too messy, and too chaotic.
Adults don’t like micro-ing their units, and teens have Dota.
Yes more maps in the pool please, with more maps comes more strategy, and by necessity less ‘staleness’ as the way in my opinion to keep things from becoming stale is not to remove old things but to add new things (remember these things are not subject to entropy in this sense).
I highly agree with your assessment that the strategy is lacking, really you are decision-making not strategizing, most to all of the strategy is inbetween the games but once it starts you pick a build order and do the things. The forethought required for strategy is limited mostly to what you end up scouting, and a lot of the mechanics of the game lend to the irreversibility of your decisions in that if you fall behind you are not allowed to choose a path you think is best, rather you are required to choose the best path. The nuance there is that the choice is not really yours.
I have also said they should do away with the notion of total symmetry if only to see more interesting map designs surface asides that I agree with your points there.
To fix this game you have start at root of problem.
You have Terran with two major over power tools that neither other races has.
One stim this tool makes very small unit to be super fast. Which is really not that op but it increase dps to insane lvls.
Put on perspective zerg gets that ability at hive upgrade.
Cause 10 hp loss but medivacs is none issue. Most updates and balance changes was because they were combating stim. Some reason blizzard didn’t want to touch the problem.
Second major issue is Terran has mule and free stealth detection.
Zerg and Protoss gets gg if they don’t have stealth detection but not Terran.
Protoss and Zerg can be destroyed by taking out its workers not Terran and Terran gets stronger since you free it’s pop. Because mule is better.
I bet you all changes wings liberty is because of stim and mule.
If you want to list “overpowered” stuff, every race has them. It’s more fun that way.
Zerg remaxes are crazy, droning is simple, creep. Some people say the queens are broken etc.
Protoss has warpgates, chronoboost, blink and mass recall etc. etc. I can go on and list more but the point is, they all have their strengths. I didn’t even touch the most important units and yet, we all know they’re pretty useful at least at something in some situation.
I don’t get your point regardless. “Terran op nerf pls”?
SC2 micro battles alone have a higher complexity than chess. SC2 is more complex and has to be played hundreds of times faster than the point where chess, which is less complex, becomes error prone and therefore random. Ergo decision making cannot exist on the time-scales that SC2 is played on. People are playing memorized actions like a pianist plays memorized notes.
It’s a way of balancing the game without having to rely on randomness to smooth out the win-rates. It takes time for the meta on a particular map to be figured out, and during that time players try a variety of strategies. Eventually a small handful of strategies are the clear winners, and it comes down to who can do those strategies the best. So the meta stabilizes with time, and that favors strong mechanical players. However, if you periodically reset the meta with new maps, it favors strategic players because they are the ones to figure out the best strategies the fastest.
I agree with this with one modification. The “decision making” that happens is extremely rare and simple, e.g. maybe 5 decisions in the entire game. Everything else, aka 99.9% of the game, is pure split second instincts.
The way SC2 is designed right now is that there is only 1 best path from the very start of the game (with very minor variations) and it’s the strategy that maximizes the multitasking pains of your opponent. It doesn’t matter if you have a technically superior strategy on paper when your opponent A) has the ability to create constant interruptions in your plans, and B) has substantially better multitasking skills than you. They will derail your ability to effectively execute your strategy.
Builds which allow a superior multitasker to pressure their opponent always trump every other advantage in the game.
Yeah there just isn’t a lot of creativity in the design process (not just maps, but balance etc) as the game is right now.
to access the chess comparison again:
There is also a strategy/plan: Control/ attack the center or a specific square. attack on king’s or queen’s flank.
but mostly you have to react to your opponent.
and you work with tactics like a fork or pin.
and try to get into positions you know and can exploit.
With sc2 it’s similar you have a plan/strategy/idea or just a build.
And in certain situations/positions you use certain units or abilities for tactics.
chrono boost must not be cast on nexus, right? chrono boost only works for one thing that is researched?
find it funny how you act like “toss has no ecco”.
Zerg no tec-no offensive army (large part of larvae obi/drones). invests everything in ecco.
Toss to min~ 6 same worker count, but at the same time already Robo/ stargate or stargate/Twilight Council + more.