Brontoforumus Archive
Game Boards => Online Hookers => Topic started by: Esperath on August 17, 2010, 05:46:33 AM
-
Thread split for organizing community multiplayer gaming night. Comment here with your friend info and I will update the top post. Also comment if there are certain hours within a day that are best for you.
STARCRAFT II PARTY TIME, SUNDAY NIGHTS at 6 PM PDT (9PM EASTERN)
Battle.net friend info:
Detonator : 205
Bal : 127
Kayma : 226
Ziiro : 518
Esperath : 738
MadMAxJr : 503
Kayin : 923
DeadEarth : 107 (Makaris)
Saral : 856 (Defenestration)
Ereror : 670 (Defenseless Cow)
Doomykins : 919
Smiler : 609
-
Oh and for anyone afraid of realID cooties, Kayin: 923
-
real id: mightyjoxam@gmail.com
-
I'm going to try and be around around 9ish today, I better see some fight.
-
Tweaked out my neck, will play if my range of motion improves by then.
Also, seems like Sunday is the best day for the zerg rush.
-
Hey got some bronto games in. GGs to Esper and Det.
-
SUNDAY (SUNDAY) SUNDAY
STARCRAFT II PARTY TIME, SUNDAY NIGHT at 6 PM PDT (9PM EASTERN)
Matchups and maps TBD. Got awesome UMS maps? Bring them along!
-
This sounds fun, but I'm too bad to do anything but ruin a large scale game via massive imbalance!
-
Who cares, show up anyway.
-
would someone be willing to play with me either 1v1 or 2vcomps to help me learn stuff? also, you should be ready to suffer me sucking. ALSO vent to communicate and tell me how I'm sucking would be nice.
-
Saral 856 is me, then! I'm on now, and I'm pretty new myself, Joxam. I may have a vent we can use.
-
I have two! TWO VENTS
-
Actually, the games I had with Joxam were pretty fun! I'll see if I'm not around on Sunday.
-
One hour until game time, be there or be Xel'Naga.
-
Good games, people I don't really know.
-
haha, finally drew zerg as a random player, didn't even know the hotkeys
-
the 2v2 was well-matched, though. a lot of back and forth
-
Yeah, that went pretty well. Defenseless Cow showed me what it's like to be a woman.
-
I hope to meet up some of you in the game later on! Yesterday I was too busy recovering from my maybe too-awesome Saturday.
-
I would like to play against some of you, just so I can get a game in with someone besides Kayin. *Grumble* He always murders my facehole with his stalkers and collosi.
-
You mean voidrays.
-
I would like to play against some of you, just so I can get a game in with someone besides Kayin. *Grumble* He always murders my facehole with his stalkers and collosi.
friend info plz
-
6pm Pacific (9pm Eastern) tonight. Be there before your Zs get nerfed.
-
5 minutes to go, are people gonna be on?
-
indeed
-
where yall bitches at
-
That was fun, we played a bunch of 4v4 against pubbies. Won two, lost two.
gg/qq all
-
I guess I might as well as leave this thing here?
Ereror-670/Ereror@gmail.com
-
I need to play this game, much, much more frequently! Other than Sunday, when should you people be around?
-
:(
-
Sorry, was out of town last week and will still probably be out of town this Sunday.
-
You can always bug me other times.
-
So, do any of you dorks still play this? I am debating getting this to play with you guys, but I don't want to spend 60 bucks on a game that I will suck in one or two games with friends in.
-
Probably not to the extent you'd like. I'll literally play whenever asked, but don't like, hang around. But also I'm a jerk who doesn't play 2v2s or anything unless a bunch of people twist my arm about it at th esame time. I'm the pure face punching experience. Esperath I'm sure will still play and I don't know what Defenstration is up to but I bet he'd play too. Also friday will be playing soon.
I'd say it's a tossup. Knowing you, I'd probably pass, but if your jonesing for Starcraft, there will be friends you can play with occasionally.
-
I was harassing joxam to play tonight and he was all 'im a bad' and I was all 'so what' and then friday said she is gonna marry SC2 and I said great let's play and she's all 'oh, I can't until we say our vows'
-
YOUR MOM'S A BAD
-
I would definately play whenever I am around. I suddenly got very very busy for good reasons, but I do love the game.
Well, I'll play as soon as my computer that isn't a laptop with 256 megs of ram is fully functional again anyway.
-
Alright, I watched replay 2. Thoughts!
Smiler: If you attacked almost anywhere between 6:00-9:00 (also go into options and turn on your clock)about, you would have won, flat out. Now, Doom could have not been macroing well because he was like "lol ez mode", but still, you had an economic lead for some time. So heres some key advice.
First: KEEP BUILDING WORKERS. NEVER STOP. EVER
Well okay, around 60 you might wanna stop(but not necessarily), but if you aren't sure, BUILD MORE SCVs. You want 30 workers per base. 24 on minerals and 6 on gas. If you're on one base and have 30 workers, KEEP BUILDING WORKERS. When your expansion finishes, send half of your mineral guys over to the other base (just a rough estimate) and your economy will jump. Neither of you were building enough workers, but Doom went so far as expanding on like, 16 drones.
Second: Try and avoid queuing. Queued money is money that could be spent NOW. It's tied up assets that aren't helping you. This is more important early on. Generally you want to try and queue a worker a little before the last finishes. Now if you have a BUILD ORDER (I'll get to that), you can kinda cheat this sometimes but anyways. Anyways this plays into the next point.
Third: SPEND MONEY. This is what killed you with Doom. You were floating like a thousand mineral. SPEND IT. If you can't spend it, BUILD MORE PRODUCTION BUILDINGS. A terran can support about 4 unit producing structures off of 1 base... Well, more like two barracks and two of any other structure (or 1 barrack, 2 factory!). That means you can almost constantly produce units out of those 4 buildings. Now, you also shouldn't queue much. You definitely shouldn't fill the cue. Thats not TRULY spending money, thats hiding money. You're new and your macro won't be good, so you're going to want MORE THAN 4 UNIT PRODUCING STRUCTURES. If you have 8 Barrack of one base, fine, whatever, thats better than not spending money. If you have less than 4 production buildings, BUILD MORE.
Fourth: This will help with all of it. USE YOUR CONTROL GROUPS. Man, even Doom didn't do this (and going easy is not an excuse). I saw you occasionally hotkey your barracks, but thats not enough. This is the setup I use for terran.
1-3 UNITS (organized however. If you end up using 1 control group for units and just attack move, thats fine for now)
4 All Command Centers. This makes it easy to mule and scan.
5 All Barracks
6 All Factories
7 All Starports
Sometimes I do stuff like combined factories and starports but thats not important. The nice thing about this is you don't have to worry about checking every building. Press 5, see if if stuff is building and then if you need more stuff, pound A and load up on marines. Multi Building Select is SOOOO good. Get into the habit of this. it also makes it easy to keep up with SCV production and moving rally points quickly. DOOM. CONTROL GROUP THOSE DAMN HATCHERIES. WHATS THE POINT OF AN EXPO WITH 3 DRONES IF YOU'RE NOT EVEN USING THE LARVA D:<
So in Short~
BUILD WORKERS(constantly)
SPEND MONEY(but don't queue)
DON'T QUEUE (when you can help it)
USE CONTROL GROUPS(and hot keys while we're at it. BUILD WORKERS, 4 S, 4 S, 4 S, 4 S!)
Some more advanced stuff. CONSIDER A BUILD ORDER.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Reactor_Hellion_Expand_(vs._Zerg) (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Reactor_Hellion_Expand_(vs._Zerg))
Also give this a look...
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=126942 (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=126942)
This allows you to quickly practice and test build orders. Spending just a half hour or so getting the basics of your order down. If you don't know what build orders mean, its timing based on your food count. Basically for example, you build your first supply depot as soon as you can after building your 10th SCV. This assumes constant SCV production, so keep em coming. This means you can queue up to your 10th scv for example and then just pay attention to other things until you can build your depot, but be careful.
I like this a lot vs Zerg. It gives you a clear cut time to put pressure on. You have to put pressure on Zerg or they will make more workers than you and crush you later. Despite popular opinion, Zerg are not aggressive early on. Well, if they are, they're cheesing. They want to be left alone. DO NOT LEAVE THEM ALONE. Every set of Zergling you force them to make and die in defense is drones that could have been.
Don't expand like a crazy person. Granted that map is "good" for that, but it's also a stupid 1v1 map. Take your natural, especially when it has a simple choke to defend from. Your wall off is primarily for the first 8 or so minutes of the game. After that, get out and defend your natural. Your natural is at the bottom of your ramp. There is a time and a place for sneaky expanding, but generally sollid play prevails. I'd also say scout more. Catch those weirdly placed expansions and KILL them.
Oh yeah, scouting. Even if you just randomly throw an SCV out to look around, it's worth it. an SCV is also cheaper than a scan, though not necessarily as informative. Scan, with the effectiveness of mules, costs about 300 minerals to use.
OH ALSO IF YOU BUILD MARINES/MARAUDERS, RESEARCH STIM PACKS FROM THE TECH LAB. Stim is AWESOME. If you have medivacs, you basically just press T every time you encounter his army.
Anyways these are all just littler things to keep in mind. Focus on the first 4. That might seem like a lot, but those are fundamental. You did very good. JUST DO THOSE 4 THINGS AND BE AGGRESSIVE. There is a time and a place for being defensive and you don't know what it is yet, so go out there and PUNCH SHIT IN THE FACE.
edit: oh and I agree with Doom, you did very well for having no experience.
-
I definitely need to get used to the mentality of building everything forever. The biggest thing I have to work on right now is micro, since I am having trouble working on more than one thing at a time. I have to build supply depots before I hit the cap.
-
I'm Doomykins 919 and Smiler is Smiler 609 for this thread.
Also Kayin I'm learning a lot myself but thanks for the pointers. For some reason, Ctrl Groups feel less necessary to me on Zerg. Bad habit I should break I suppose. I Ctrl Group routinely on Terran/Toss but on Zerg I have to make the rounds and spit on every hatchery anyway.
Also.. the hatchery with three drones? I think that's the one Smiler used his first scan on, which really ruined it's "he will never check here" surprise expansion nature! Like I said, I expected him to raze it within a minute so I neglected it for at least five minutes. It was a stroke of luck for him(2:7 odds to actually scan somewhere I am/expanding to) and if he was bolder I'd have been in trouble.
Doom vs Smiler 1 (http://doom.pyoko.org/Smiler1.SC2Replay) Human-like Harass Training
Doom vs Smiler 2 (http://doom.pyoko.org/Smiler2.SC2Replay) Human-like Scouting Training
-
Doom vs Smiler 3 (http://doom.pyoko.org/Smiler3.SC2Replay) Really fun, pretty tense.
Doom vs Smiler 4 (http://doom.pyoko.org/Smiler4.SC2Replay) Even tenser, I was sweating bullets at the finale.
Doom vs Smiler 5 (http://doom.pyoko.org/Smiler5.SC2Replay) Comedy Outtake. Sorry friend, but you do want to learn about everything in SC2 multi-player, right?
In before "your macro is awful why are you floating 1400 minerals as Zerg." I'm still learning myself and it's always hard to remember everything when you're using 3 unique groups at once to pincer, flank and multi-harass. And I just plain got supply-capped on Protoss because they ain't Mai Alien Queen Waifus. Over my last ten or so rounds overall, I can see that I really need to get used to Zerg Mid/Late Game macro. I always seem to go too long without extra Hatcheries.
Smiler improves with every game, this man will become an unstoppable beast soon.
-
I'm back. And surely out of practice, but PM me if you want to fite.
-
I am up for some games. Find me on #ff.
-
Me and Friday played some gaems tonight while Esper and Kayin watched.
Smiler vs Friday part 1 (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/123768/sc2/Replays/friday%201.SC2Replay)
Friday made air units. I heard that she was making air units in other games, so I made air defenses. She researched cloak, which I didn't know existed. I win just because I had so much resources I was sitting on plus an expansion.
Smiler vs Friday part 2 (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/123768/sc2/Replays/Friday%202.SC2Replay)
Scrap brain zone. Friday tried to ambush me through all of the rocks, but luckily I sent my vikings over her rapesquad, and I managed to counter it.
BONUS ROUND: KAYIN VS ESPERATH (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/123768/sc2/Replays/Kayin%20vs%20Esper.SC2Replay)
People who know how to macro fight. I don't know much of what happened. Esperath won.
-
Upon playing these games I realized that I was stupid for trying to learn SC2 on Terran. They were always my least favorite race.
Kayin, what was up with your micro :(
-
I was out of practice so my micro was slipping. Not saying that as an excuse because Esper hasn't played either, but I think thats why there are more silly mistakes in that game. I also need to work on my Terran. I can only beat Esper as Protoss but he'll beat me in any other matchup. Anyways GG Friday, I think you'll catch up nicely.
-
Smiler I am proud.
also my favorite terran mineral burning trick is to grab 3 SCVS and shift-click 3-6 barracks and then reactor them all, ctrl group, and if my blues get too high I hit that ctrl group number and mash the A key about twenty times.
-
http://kayin.pyoko.org/kayinfriday.rar (http://kayin.pyoko.org/kayinfriday.rar)
10 games with friday. The first 5 are pretty stompy. Final score is 7:3. Friday wins 3 of the later games....
Lost Temple: Wins with Voidray rush the one time I choose to FE :(
Zerg Metalopalis: Wonderful 4gate push. I screw up losing a bunch of roaches due to keeping them on the Xelnaga tower. She crushe sme before I could eco thwomp her.
Last game on Angria Plains: She flat out beats me, PvP. Friday grows strong.
-
Kayin is best teacher because if you make a mistake he kills you instantly, thus motivating you to never make that same mistake
-
There have been a lot of people playing lately, which is awesome!
Also, we placed bronze in 3v3 loooolz
-
Problem is we have no idea what the hell sort of build we should be doing. 1v1 builds just don't cut it.
-
That, and you can't use that avatar on Battlenet, which would automatically overpower any of their defenses
-
this is why I just flat out avoid non 1v1s.
-
As Det was saying, it pays to be aggressive because it's so much harder to organize 3 people for defense compared to grouping up 3 people to attack. After we launch the first strike and then follow it with some more pressure we can shift into what actual build we want to do.
-
yay
-
Man, I can't get over how fun 3v3 is. I usually feel all pressured to perform in 1v1, and while fun, that gets really draining quick. Doom Esper and I did some 3v3s and lost about as much as we won but the thing is it was fun the whole time regardless.
Then Doom and I did some 1v1 and he beat the shit out of me with Thors.
-
But then I tried to Protoss v Protoss you and you were like "this is how you macro, bitch."
Sh.. she 4-gated me. (http://doom.pyoko.org/Negative_man.jpg)
Also yeah dang those 3v3s were something else. I liked making the most of our talents! Friday and Esper have super solid Protoss Macro, Esper knows how to do the early stomp game, Friday leaps up the tech tree thrice as fast as those other psionic chumps and here I am just snooping all over the place and IT'S HARASSMENT TIME NO DAD, NO.
-
So last night I'm in the middle of an epic PvP game that's gone on for over 20 minutes. We both opened with early robo and the entire game has basically been WAR OF THE WORLDS ALSO STARRING SOME STALKERS AND ZEALOTS. Finally we've both managed to crush our opponents expansions and are engaged in a base trade when I attack his main only to have his force show up in mine.
Trouble is, he's been outproducing me and has a slightly larger force mopping up the last of my buildings. Things look grim except then suddenly the reason he's been outproducing me these last five minutes becomes clear: My Mothership finally warps in.
I emit a very Doom like dohohohoho as I vortex his entire ball with only a Nexus and Pylon remaining, allowing me to finish off his base and claim victory.
Then I play another game where I am again blown away by Thors. oh you made Immortals? that's nice I have five hundred SCVs repairing
-
ahaha, were you playing randos?
-
yeah, just doing bronze league
which seems to be populated by 50% people who I crush, and 50% people who crush me
I think the only close game so far has been the one I described above.
-
Inspired by Team Void Ray I decided to pass up my remaining 30-something free babby meat league matches and do my placements.
3 slam dunk victories and... two fucking disconnects. Silver ahoy.
The first disconnect really irritated me. The guy had a very impressive Tier 1 Zealot/Stalker ball and cannons ringing his natural to spell out "No Harass Here Pal."
But it was Metalopolis and the entire back of his base, steam-cloud spot and all were unwatched. My two changelings patrolled through his base for their entire life-spans. I WAS A SINGLE NYDUS WORM FROM A TOTAL BASE WIPE. And I fucking disconnect! I also had him scouted so hard I was banging his Executor's Mom, so I had a giant hydra/ling ball waiting to show him what I think of Protoss tier 1 units. Damn it all.
The second disconnect was a bit less offensive but still lame: finish loading map, told I'm disconnected as I go to grab my starting workers.
-
the thing about the practice league is it isn't.
I guess you can practice build order, but that's it. They should have just not had any rocks and done faster speed, so people could get used to playing the game how it is actually played for 50 games. That would have been fine.
-
Oh, I'm fully aware. I just enjoyed a league that let me devour babies as I see fit. I won every round by cracking *their* rock open and harassing as I pleased.
I spent about a hundred co-op rounds learning to macro, as that's far more effective. You either survive the 3 army rape-train at 7 minutes or you lose.
-
so it turns out the people in gold league are nothing but relentless killing machines
-
bismuth league is for the cool kids
-
We could probably handle Gold League if we practiced SC2 at least 5 rounds a day, something reasonable but "hardcore" like that.
But Cataclysm in 2 weeks who can be fucked
-
(http://imgur.com/2XkZa.jpg)
LET'S GET DOWN TO BUSINESS
TO DEFEAT
THE TOSS
DID THEY SEND ME BROODLINGS
WHEN I ASKED FOR ULTRAS?
YOU'RE THE WRIGGLIEST BUNCH I EVER MET
BUT YOU CAN BET BEFORE WE'RE THROUGH
LARVA, I'LL MAKE A ZERG OUT OF YOU
-
reps plz, so I can gawk at how dumb 3v3 is (and actually give advice)
-
keep in mind we were all rusty as shit after not playing for 2 weeks.
-
(http://imgur.com/2XkZa.jpg)
LET'S GET DOWN TO BUSINESS
TO DEFEAT
THE TOSS
DID THEY SEND ME BROODLINGS
WHEN I ASKED FOR ULTRAS?
YOU'RE THE WRIGGLIEST BUNCH I EVER MET
BUT YOU CAN BET BEFORE WE'RE THROUGH
LARVA, I'LL MAKE A ZERG OUT OF YOU
BE A ZERG
You must be swift as a 3/3 crackling
BE A ZERG
With all the macro of a great zerg player
BE A ZERG
With all the strength of a raging Ultra
Mysterious as the dark side of the TEEEEEEEEEMPLAR
-
Didn't save any Kayin, but they were basically
Game 1: get out-macroed hard by two 4 gaters and a bioball
Game 2: all 3 rush dark templars
Embarrassing shitty losses caused by not playing for two weeks.
-
All replays are saved.
\Documents\StarCraft II\Accounts\#########\#########\Replays\Unsaved
Also thats part of why I hate anything over 2v2 (I kinda hate 2v2 as well but its harder for me to say theres something wrong with it). Cheeeeeese city. It's like, distills the game down to it's stupidest parts.
-
How is losing to 3 players DT rushing any different than losing to 1 player DT rushing? Cheese is countered by good scouting.
-
Also, god forbid the build orders for 3v3 be less monolithically rigid than in 1v1. What, your single strategy doesn't work every single time because there's more complexity to handle?
-
How is losing to 3 players DT rushing any different than losing to 1 player DT rushing? Cheese is countered by good scouting.
Concentration of force makes it a lot different. For example in 2v2, if two players 6 pool, even if scouted, one player is likely to die.
Why?
It is easier to merge offense than it is to merge defense. The six pooling players immediately take initiative and can mass 3 players worth of strength on one point, . They can control the ramps and pick off reinforcements. Your defenses need to be spread evenly across 3 ramps, but their offense does not. This is very basic!
The spot where we intend to fight must not be made known, for then the enemy will have to prepare against a possible attack at several different points; and his forces being thus distributed in many directions, the numbers we shall have to face at any given point will be proportionately few.
Numerical weakness comes from having to prepare against possible attacks; numerical strength from compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us. Knowing the place and time of the coming battle, we may concentrate from the greatest distances in order to fight. But if neither time nor place be known, then the left wing will be impotent to succor the right, the right equally impotent to succor the left, the van unable to relieve the rear, or the rear to support the van.
... Sun Tzu said that - and I think he knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal; because HE INVENTED IT! And he perfected it until no man could best him in Star Craft!
Unlike a 1v1 you have, especially in the early game, 3 primary points to defend, while the enemy only has to attack one of them. This situation in 1v1 only comes up when you have 3 naturals and a sizable army to defend it. That is a lot different from a single player 6 pool. 3v3 is NOT equal to 3 1v1s, balance wise. That doesn't mean said things are necessarily unbeatable or anything, but as I said, the game as a whole is sillier. To be fair, the economical damage of a 6pool means that the two surviving players have a fair shot if the dead player died slow enough, (and I admit, this is somewhat interesting), but it is in no way equivalent. DT rushing is a little less stable, but again, the same deal applies. If they do enough damage before detection shows up, it won't matter. They can come in with so many more DTs than a single rush would on a single point.
(though as a note, a more manly build would be DT, DT, Phoenixs and some observers, though this is also a valid 1v1 build vs Zerg)
Balance does not scale evenly in games. Even in a game that has a bazillion players like tf2 -- that game suffers when numbers are reduced to a certain point. Pretty much every game with asymmetrical elements has to struggle to maintain balance over different player counts. Is it really that hard to see that with increased players, the balance will get thrown out of whack more? Hell, Reapers got nerfed sheerly because double reaper pushes were almost unstoppable in 1v1. They were damn good in 1v1 early game, but people managed to figure out how to deal with them. Heck, Blizzard as said they don't really care about 3v3 (or greater) balance because it's a lost cause.
Also, god forbid the build orders for 3v3 be less monolithically rigid than in 1v1. What, your single strategy doesn't work every single time because there's more complexity to handle?
Esperath, I know you know Starcraft, so why would you say something so entirely ignorant? Build orders do not work that way. They are not monolithic, nor is "one single strategy every time" a winning decision. Also while the amount of potential situations are exponentially more complex, that doesn't mean the DECISIONS are any more complex. I'd even consider arguing that 3v3 is less complex, gameplay wise because everything is broken down into big, basic chunks and multiple races on a team homogenize the capability of each side. And also, you're saying this while getting your heads stomped by silly stuff. Stuff like that 6pool example above is STABLE. It is a single, monolithic build that works on all maps and matchups FAAAAR better than it does in 1v1. Pretty much any 'cheese' tends to be less cheese and more stable in 3v3 (or even 2v2), while still being just as silly. Also on that topic, I have loose orders for all most matchups and distances and even for some maps. In a 3v3, your more than likely going to stick to one thing every time, until you scout something that makes you do something else. That happens in 1v1 as well, but 1v1 is discrete enough in information, reliability and nuance that you can have complex plans for every matchup and map.
Anyways, forgive me for playing the game in the way Blizzard actually had in mind when designing the game? D: I know I'm a jerk, but honestly "Hey, we're having fun, shut up" is a way better argument (and often makes me feel like a jerk!) than trying to act like things are just as legitimate (if not more legitimate!) over on silly street. It's not like I say stuff without being prepared to defend my points.
-
Anyways, forgive me for playing the game in the way Blizzard actually had in mind when designing the game? D: I know I'm a jerk, but honestly "Hey, we're having fun, shut up" is a way better argument (and often makes me feel like a jerk!) than trying to act like things are just as legitimate (if not more legitimate!) over on silly street. It's not like I say stuff without being prepared to defend my points.
it doensn't sound like you were having much fun at all
-
what
-
Kayin, everyone knows that you hate fun.
-
Thats funny, because I don't like 2v2 or 3v3 because I don't find them fun. Strange how that works!
-
If a technique gives you a consistent strategic advantage, it's no longer cheese, it's a valid strategy. If a strategy provides an unfair advantage, then it's either up to the game designer (Blizzard) to fix it, or for the game organizer (in this case, generally also Blizzard) to ban it. The fact that you see such a huge variety of "cheese" suggests that there is no single best way to play large games, but there are lots of viable paths that simply aren't available for use in single player.
The point is that large games play differently, and they require you to accept both imperfections in your teammates and imperfections in communication on both sides. Oh no, people are using crap-tier 1v1 units! Guess what, they work well in 3v3 and they still have viable counters! It's just that there are so many viable builds that you need to be more flexible to deal with it, and even so, you won't always win, all of the time.
Since we're quoting stuff, I'd compare 1v1 to team games like this:
1v1:
Rocky had come equipped with a gun
To shoot off the legs of his rival
His rival it seems had broken his dreams
By stealing the girl of his fancy.
...
Rocky burst in and grinning a grin
He said Danny boy this is a showdown
But Daniel was hot-he drew first and shot
And Rocky collapsed in the corner.
-Winston Churchill
Team games:
What would you think if I sang out of tune,
Would you stand up and walk out on me.
Lend me your ears and I'll sing you a song,
And I'll try not to sing out of key.
Oh I get by with a little help from my friends,
Mmm,I get high with a little help from my friends,
Mmm, I'm gonna try with a little help from my friends.
-Hitler, apparently
I feel like the best argument you can make (and did point out at one point) is that the game is balanced for 1v1 and that this doesn't scale, so you can't correct deficiencies in the team games without screwing up 1v1. The fact that not every 3v3 team or 4v4 team is playing the exact same build or set of builds argues against that. The combinatorial complexity of large, mixed armies, makes it more difficult to build a stalwart bastion against all comers, and I think that's great! The other thing, which is also true, is that team games are less popular and don't reach the 'optimal' plateau as quickly, so maybe there are 'optimal' builds that just haven't been discovered yet.
-
While most cheeses are not directly comparable to multiple instances of 1v1s, the 3 DT rush really is. Each player scouts one enemy. Each reports that their chosen enemy is fast-teching. Each player chooses their own opponent and punishes them individually, as would happen in a 1v1. Team offense simply isn't the way to deal with this cheese.
At this point, you could go "well, maybe one of them will survive long enough to get their DTs out", but at this point, you only need a single player with detection.
The main reason that I snipe at you so much even though we're both very friendly is that I get really tired of your competitive elitism. The "stupidest elements" of the game are fun for the people who choose to partake in it. You challenge my "ignorance" when it is simply true that 3v3 adds more potential complexity to a game than does a 1v1. Yes, you need a flexible build in 1v1, but it's the same give and take in every game. You lead, scout, counter, and continue to counter along the decision tree as information comes in. There's nothing wrong with that, but the decision tree is simply bushier when you have three armies a piece and the added chaos that comes along with it.
You play the version of the game where you get immediate reinforcement: it is clear that the more skilled single player wins over the less skilled single player, with reasonably little variance. This is more difficult to assay in a team, but through enough iterations, the league system still manages to do that. The issue is that there is more variance within individual games. Instead of having a 95%/5% split for a given skill disparity, it may be more like 80%/20%. If you play team games, you simply have to accept that your imperfections in communication, combined with the added complexity of viable builds, simply leads to more randomness in the individual game results.
While I hate the "blue-shell effect" as much as anyone else, this isn't an issue of the game providing a means for simply negating the advantages of the most skilled, but rather providing a larger space in which to potentially beat your opponent. Yes, you can choose the same cheese every single time, and once you actually get into a decent league, you'll still win your 20% of the games, but you'll asymptote somewhere mediocre. If your team has fun continuing to do that same cheese, fine! They can enjoy sitting in silver or gold executing the same plan for the rush of winning 1 in 5 games. Others can play how they see fit, and the space in which they can execute viable builds is simply larger than afforded in 1v1.
-
Implication that valid Strategies = Good Gameplay
While this is true, the issue is no one really cares about making 3v3 a good, proper game. A lot of things aren't "cheese" in 3v3 but that doesn't necessarily impy that they aren't bad or degenerate. If a strategy won 100% of the time, it wouldn't be cheese, but it would be horrible for the game. Obviously 3v3 isn't at this in that bad shape, but just because something is valid doesn't mean it isn't degenerate. No one really cares about fixing the more numerous versions of the game either. No ones trying to fix FFA either, where the best strategy is to never attack. These are options added to the game so people can have fun and mess around, but they cease being refined gameplay experiences.
Implication that more build order = More Balanced/Better
This is a bit silly. More isn't inherently better and also most of these builds are accomplishing the same thing. Are you rushing so you can do damage and join your armies up before your opponent? Are you doing some mass are or cloak? Are you doing a bunch of all-ins across all players? The compositions can be more complicated, but the actual decisions are pretty straight forward.
Implication that different means equal.
"The point is that large games play differently, and they require you to accept both imperfections in your teammates and imperfections in communication on both sides."
The problem with this is the game isn't designed for it unlike say DOTA/LOL/HON/Random MOBA. That is a fine thing to base a game around, but Starcraft was not designed to create interesting decisions and encourage team work in 3v3s. It barely can do it in 2v2.
You challenge my "ignorance" when it is simply true that 3v3 adds more potential complexity to a game than does a 1v1. Yes, you need a flexible build in 1v1, but it's the same give and take in every game. You lead, scout, counter, and continue to counter along the decision tree as information comes in. There's nothing wrong with that, but the decision tree is simply bushier when you have three armies a piece and the added chaos that comes along with it
I challenge your ignorance in saying 1v1 games are monolithic. Also while on paper, your right, the game is more complicated as I said. There are more possible game states. But that doesn't mean the game is ACTUALLY more complex. an FPS has near infinite game states, but they cannot all be considered. Conversely a game like chess has complexity that is close to the limit of human optimization (though still exceeds it). So are the practical decisions any more interesting? I'd argue no, as games tend to come down to more extreme strategies on average and the value of optimizing for various situations are reduced at the micro end of play (while being mostly the same in in the macro sense).
While most cheeses are not directly comparable to multiple instances of 1v1s, the 3 DT rush really is. Each player scouts one enemy. Each reports that their chosen enemy is fast-teching. Each player chooses their own opponent and punishes them individually, as would happen in a 1v1. Team offense simply isn't the way to deal with this cheese.
At this point, you could go "well, maybe one of them will survive long enough to get their DTs out", but at this point, you only need a single player with detection.
DT is more similar than most other builds for sure. My concern was more to the fact that most 3v3 build are "cheese" builds. 3x DT might actually be cheese, but still, it's not the same. First off, it's not so simple as saying "oh he's teching and I know he is so he loses". Any good tech build can hold off most aggression without dying, especially considering the dubious decision to attack each opponent at the same time, negating the advantage of your team taking the initiative (being able to consolidate forces). You could obtain 3 contains, but theres no way of to always be sure what tech they're doing. Anyways, 3 players worth of DT can, more so than a single player DT build, obtain a much larger amount of map control and, if not every player is prepared to get detection in time, spread it even thinner than a normal game. They can also do much more damage in their initial push than they could with a single DT build. If the DTs go undetected, a mass of DTs can kill off a player before they can respond with detection, leaving the other two players to fend them off. It is similar and it is not strictly the same. It does seem like a pretty silly all in though.
The main reason that I snipe at you so much even though we're both very friendly is that I get really tired of your competitive elitism. The "stupidest elements" of the game are fun for the people who choose to partake in it.
I might be sassy about this but I tend to avoid having outward contempt for the PEOPLE who play a game a certain why but I feel totally justified dissing on a game. Mario Party is a piece of shit, but people have fun playing that. I still feel totally fair in saying 3v3, design wise, is a shitty game type focusing more on shenanigans and extreme strategies. That doesn't mean it can't be fun for people. People find 2Fort fun in TF2. I have fun with stupid things too quite often! And hey, I was asking for replays to give advice and be helpful -- I just also took a pot shot at the legitimacy of the gametype. I don't think that is entirely unfair.
Anyways thank you for actually defending your self and not rolling over, I hate it when people do that. You have some good points, but I disagree with the implications. I understand why that would be fun, but in terms of a polished game experience and as a legitimate gametype, I would disagree, but whatever. I try not to criticize people for how they have fun (usually!), but I feel no remorse for hating on games and game types. Liking such things is in no way a negative statement on ones character.
-
I'm not going to respond to everything right now, but your 'summaries' of my stances expose your elitism and your critical flaw in understanding my thinking. I never argued that team games were better or superior to 1v1, but rather that they simply are a valid and fully functional alternative, and are fun to those who choose to partake in them. I am not even trying to make an 'equivalent' comparison; the game mode is available, utilized, and fun, especially for those who enjoy exploring the larger game space that team games make available.
Yes, it's a lot like generalizing chess out to many dimensions (insert MSPA image here). Humans can't handle the full complexity of the space and develop reductionist strategies to get from point A to point B. And yet, there are still more viable paths from point A to point B, and more skilled teams will still be able to utilize a larger portion of the gameplay space and effectively deny a greater number of the opponent's paths. I also don't feel that tightness of gameplay necessarily equates to better. As long as you have reasonable control over the clusterfuck, greater skill will still statistically prevail, if not in every single skirmish.
-
To be clear, I can disagree with
valid and fully functional alternative
and not disagree with
and are fun to those who choose to partake in them. I am not even trying to make an 'equivalent' comparison; the game mode is available, utilized, and fun.
which is what my position is. Unless by "valid and Fully Functional" you mean "a feature in the game I can use", then whatever, I got no issue with that statement.
-
Yeah, this is why I expanded out my edit. :3
-
Also, I feel like Starcraft team gaming is well-suited for league or round-robin competitive structures, but not the elimination style tourneys that dominate the 1v1 competitive league. Blizzard specifically plays up this point by explicitly supporting the league structure, while outside entities still need to run the 1v1 tourneys.
-
I'm just going to throw out an example to show that this isn't fueled on elitism. I played Smash Bros Melee in a competitive fashion. I would also say its dumb and not good in the same way I would 3v3 in starcraft. The options are merely an afterthought and theres no good structure or design to anything. Its fun, and even playable, but it's still dumb. This can work both both ways.
It isn't competitive elitism, it's game design elitism.
-
[23:19] <Esperath> FRIDAY AND I MAKE GOOD TEAM
[23:19] <Esperath> I really love having those forward pylons
[23:22] <BongoBill> Esperath likes his traffic cones to be sexually assertive.
[23:23] <Koah> Esperath likes his traffic cones like he likes his women.
[23:23] <Koah> Impacting the bumper of a car going at high speed.
[23:24] <Esperath> stationary and providing food
[23:25] <Friday> I LIKE MY PYLONS LIKE I LIKE MY WOMEN
[23:25] <Friday> TRAP CARD
[23:25] <Friday> OH NO
[23:26] <BongoBill> OH YES
[23:26] <Romosome> I like my pylons like I like my women
[23:26] <BongoBill> bright orange
-
got promoted to Silver League today.
also am trying out Terran builds. Nothing amazing so far but goddamn is MMM good.
Hell, a lot of times just marines and marauders is enough to crack people.
-
Esper and I did some more 2v2s for the first time in a long time
LESSON ONE: why don't you have detection WHY DON'T YOU HAVE DETECTION
-
I didn't see anyone else post it, but Friday, Romo and I just placed Platinum in 3v3 today.
-
my favorite moment was when I looked at the minimap and red's base was entirely destroyed by your reapers
reapers gonna raep
-
And I just placed Silver 1v1. Not as impressive, but hey I finally got through my placement matches and I actually won the last two.
-
Like I said before, it's much easier to place higher in team games. If you look at the average player's account, usually all their team leagues are a league or two higher than their 1v1.
-
Most of the people we lose to in 2v2/3v3 are in like diamond 1v1. :humpf: