StarCraft 2

[Li-Ion]

Originally Posted by k8to

The PVP (battleground) component of wow uses the exact same abilities as the pve part.

I have to comment on that for a second: the pvp uses the same abilities, but they work differently than in pve. Polymorph is one of my favourite spells but it's usefulness is completely different in pve and pvp. The game mechanics about hitting with spells and weapons against mobs and other players are also different. PvE and PvP in WoW are two completely different pairs of shoes, which is also reflected in the completely different item sets that you get as PvE and PvP rewards.

To the rest: I agree that you can lean more on your team in battlegrounds, but unless you go alterac valley you might very well get abuse from fellow players if you turn out to be a total noob (happened to me at least).

Originally Posted by LordFarid

That means if your outgunned you can gear up till you outgun (and thus defeat) most opponents.
[...]
Furthermore rock/sciccors/paper gameplay means that when im on my disc priest i will kill the pally or the dk, when im on my dk i will kill the warrior and certainly the rogue, etc, etc.
[...]
Not having played the SC 2 multiplayer yet, i reckon that the more complex gameplay with controlling so many units, and the lack of the options to go back to pve and get better "guns" as well as the lack of a real rock/paper/scissors system (as far as i know the 3 factions are balanced and all perfectly able to defeat each other) means that playing against a SC1 pro will certainly mean defeat.

The gearing up process in WoW involves a massive time investment. I'd argue that with a similar time investment in the multiplayer part of SC2 you can also improve your odds against the average player and indeed defeat roughly 50% of your opponents.

The rock/paper/shotgun of SC2 lies in the different units of course. Every unit and unit combination in SC has an equivalent counter. It takes time and a certain amount of dedication to learn all about this, but the basics don't take longer than levelling your paladin to 80 and get epix in the battlegrounds.

I started with some multiplayer matches (and got completely destroyed usually ). The first 50 unranked matches are on special maps that are designed to prevent early rushes (the access to the base is blocked by rocks) and the game speed is significantly reduced, i.e. you can practice your build order and micro-management skills fairly well here. I was chatting with my opponents there and at least they say that they hardly ever played SC multiplayer before, so I guess you are put against other noobs there. If that doesn't turn out you can get back to the challenges labelled 'exploration', where you can practice certain things like hotkeys or rush defense against the cpu.

That doesn't take away the fact that SC is a hardcore RTS in the end. However, Blizzard put considerable effort into making the multiplayer part more accessible to "normal folks" as I saw in any other RTS so far.

[LordFarid]

By the way as a sidenote, one of the greatest things about SC2 is the way the units look and how they feel. Everytime a new unit is added to your armada is just so much fun to click on them for their responses, and to move them around. Their looks and sounds really blend together in a way that makes each unit interesting.

After playing SC2 for sometime i really do hope that at one point in the future we get world of starcraft. It would be amazing to see all these units as options to pick in a first person type action oriented MMO.

[Tim Spaeth]

I was annihilated in the placement matches; went 0 for 5 and I'm now 100/100 in the bronze league. There's something novel and exciting about being the worst StarCraft II multiplayer gamer on Earth. Or tied for the honor, at least.

As incredibly polished as this game is, it does a terrible job of training you for multiplayer...for example there's nothing that explains the importance of early game build order. If you aren't building SCV's, supply depots, barracks, refineries, etc. (or whatever the Zerg and Protoss equivalents are) in exactly the right order, at exactly the right time, you are likely screwed. It's a metagame that requires some extracurricular research; Youtube videos, player blogs, whatever.

I'm not opposed to that idea; if you want to be competitive you should have to put in the time. I'm not sure it's for me though. Frankly I'd like to see a mode where both players build up a massive infrastructure for 30 minutes (my favorite part of StarCraft) then instead of fighting, they just visit each other's bases and admire the architecture. I hate when other players interrupt my meticulous city construction with their "combat units" and attempts to "win the game."

[Li-Ion]

Originally Posted by Tim Spaeth

I was annihilated in the placement matches; went 0 for 5 and I'm now 100/100 in the bronze league. There's something novel and exciting about being the worst StarCraft II multiplayer gamer on Earth. Or tied for the honor, at least.

Can't be much worse than me. In my last game I managed to mess up pretty well... my first colossus was trapped in between my glorious building placement, so that I was forced to destroy my own pylon to get it free (which left me supply-blocked of course). Just after that I trapped my own melee units with a forcefield, which served as a nice shooting gallery for the siege tanks of my enemy. Yeah, I pretty much suck at Starcraft 2. I didn't proceed to the placement matches yet, I continue with the first 50 games which are unrated to get more practice. Currently loosing 2 out of 3 games. I'm not planning to go to rated games before the win-loose ratio is at least 50:50

If it's the architecture you're after, why not play a nice game of the Settlers or Anno 1701?

[Tim Spaeth]

Li-Ion - The practice matches aren't really indicative of the "real" multi-player experience. I actually did very well in the practice league. You may be doing yourself more harm than good by not getting your placement matches over with -- you don't want to get too used to the slower pace.

[Richard Naik]

I've played two placement matches so far and been destroyed. I didn't try the practice league yet, as I wanted to see what I was in for.

On another note, does anyone know if battle.net tracks hours played? I'd rather not have to guess when I do the review.

[Richard Naik]

Originally Posted by Tim Spaeth

I was annihilated in the placement matches; went 0 for 5 and I'm now 100/100 in the bronze league. There's something novel and exciting about being the worst StarCraft II multiplayer gamer on Earth. Or tied for the honor, at least.

As incredibly polished as this game is, it does a terrible job of training you for multiplayer...for example there's nothing that explains the importance of early game build order. If you aren't building SCV's, supply depots, barracks, refineries, etc. (or whatever the Zerg and Protoss equivalents are) in exactly the right order, at exactly the right time, you are likely screwed. It's a metagame that requires some extracurricular research; Youtube videos, player blogs, whatever.

I'm not opposed to that idea; if you want to be competitive you should have to put in the time. I'm not sure it's for me though. Frankly I'd like to see a mode where both players build up a massive infrastructure for 30 minutes (my favorite part of StarCraft) then instead of fighting, they just visit each other's bases and admire the architecture. I hate when other players interrupt my meticulous city construction with their "combat units" and attempts to "win the game."

I wouldn't go so far as to say it doesn't prepare you-the single player does an adequate job of introducing you to the basics like resource gathering and building.

In multiplayer speed is everything, and that's why I'm terrible. I'm extremely methodical in the way that I build things, which is cannon fodder for someone that knows what they're doing.

Cheer up Tim. Know that I would not want to face the Battlecruiser Tomarken in combat. I still need to think of a good flagship name...

[Li-Ion]

Originally Posted by Tim Spaeth

You may be doing yourself more harm than good by not getting your placement matches over with -- you don't want to get too used to the slower pace.

Jump into the pool of sharks without swimming lessons you mean?

[Dramund]

Originally Posted by Tim Spaeth

for example there's nothing that explains the importance of early game build order. If you aren't building SCV's, supply depots, barracks, refineries, etc. (or whatever the Zerg and Protoss equivalents are) in exactly the right order, at exactly the right time, you are likely screwed. It's a metagame that requires some extracurricular research; Youtube videos, player blogs, whatever.

I can't think of a single RTS with base-building where that rule doesn't apply. Even in newer RTSs, where you have "heroes", "commanders" or whatever the hell they call them now, the advantage is less apparent because you won't get rushed but is definitely there. Getting your base of operations up and running as efficiently as possible, meaning building the right unit as soon as you have resources, is the very beginning of being able to hold your own competitively. Once you get that initial build order down, you can start to actually have fun.

[coperdv]

Never really played Starcraft, am I missing out, when starcraft came along I sometimes played other strategy games like total anhilation if anyones remebers that

[dorramide7]

Thats how multiplayer works in most game, right?
Either you are a master-ninja caliber player, or you get destroyed by the people that are.

Isnt that what people expect from multiplayer?
I know that is why I avoid playing games online.


__________________
how to copy wii games
copying wii games

[Zanbatou]

I don't think that's true of StarCraft 2, though. It has the best matchmaking system of any game I've played. It just takes a number of games before it can accurately place you into the system. I think everyone who has played more than 20 games is happy with their placement (or at least, they start to win about half the time). There's still a huge variety of players playing the game, and the system does a great job at pairing similarly skilled players together.

And if you ever have a particularly exciting and close game against someone, you can always befriend them and ask if they'd like to play some custom matches off of the ladder.

[Li-Ion]

I recently started to play Starcraft 2 again. Mainly because of the PSNotwork. Played mostly 2v2 in a team with a cousin and a bit 1v1 and I'm having a blast. The first placement matches were a disaster, but in the fourth we actually found someone who played worse than us and now we're clawing our way up the 2v2 bronze league.

In 1v1 I'm even placed in silver league, which means there is a whole league of starcraft players playing worse than me! Watching my replays I sometimes wonder how I exactly manage to win. My last 1v1 against a Zerg I was outgunned and outnumbered but somehow managed to defeat his overwhelming army (300 style at a narrow pass). To add insult to injury I dropped a tactical nuke on his main base before crushing the rest of the swarm with the steel fists of a bunch of Thors

[Paxton]

yeah i have recently started to play starcraft and this game is very amazing and i am much inspired from this game and i highly recommend this game.