Starcraft 2

[Sombre]

I don't agree with this whatsoever. The single-player missions are far more varied and well-tuned in my opinion, and the persistent tech and research component adds a dimension I really enjoy.

The multiplayer is based on the same gameplay dynamic, but it's not "the same." There are new units, removed units, more race-specific mechanics, better support for various types of queuing, and any number of other things that don't fundamentally change the game but certainly make it much more playable in 2010. Going back to StarCraft 1 would be very difficult for me at this point.

Then there's the challenge mode, which has absolutely no point of comparison in the first game, and the mapmaking and modding tools, which will clearly produce a far more diverse level of output than the first game did.

For want of forming my own opinions in a big long post, I think the RPS guys sum things up perfectly here

[CaptainFish]

Have you guys actually played the original starcraft recently? The broodwar zerg campaign turns into the worst slog through base after base after base at full tech. 6 of 10 missions are just: build a big base, fight against an enemy that already has several huge bases, but none of the forces to really back it up. The campaigns for the other races have that as well, but at least they're only 8 missions long in Brood War. It's as though they wanted to tell more story for the zerg, but had less actual compelling level design. It's boring. The plot was also very guilty of plot twist extravaganzas and god moding. If Kerrigan can mind control one of the eldest protoss leaders, how is she not just enthralling the entire universe by this point?

I'm much more glad that they decided to focus on small scale character interactions and one shot mission stories with a major plot related finale. Of course a lot of those interactions are against a backdrop of lame jokes and references and the worst credit song imaginable, but there's still some quality there. Also, it's explained why most missions don't have a lot to do with the major plot, and even then they still end up having an effect on the world state. Only the Dr. Hanson and Tosh missions feel like they are unrelated and won't matter in later games, and Blizzard could prove me wrong on that.

As for the multiplayer, they managed to make each race seem even more like that race while improving the playability a lot. Even with all those changes it still rewards those who are able to micromanage their troops more effectively. I'm not saying it's perfect, but I can't really think of any changes to make at this point, that wouldn't just make the rewards for better micro insignificant.

[Moelman]

To anyone who is good at multiplayer: How do you beat Protoss cannon rush? I play Zerg.

P.S. that strategy is the lamest shit ever.

[Forbin]

To anyone who is good at multiplayer: How do you beat Protoss cannon rush? I play Zerg.

P.S. that strategy is the lamest shit ever.

scout early, and early pool if you need to. Often you may need to bring your drones in to destroy the pylon. Zerg's got an advantage that the overloard can guard your ramp, so you shouldn't be getting any unexpected pylons if you're paying attention. Also, most players won't attempt a pylon rush if they know they've been spotted, even if they don't know you were too busy to notice them.

Also, once you've thwarted the attack, immediately send zerglings into his base. He'll have invested in a Forge instead of a gateway, and lost a pylon, so you should have the upper hand.

[Chris]

For want of forming my own opinions in a big long post, I think the RPS guys sum things up perfectly here

I know this is a douchey way to respond, but the format of that article is quite possibly the least appealing way they could possibly have presented that information. If it were an audio discussion, I'd consider listening to it, and if they had taken those comments and turned them into an actual piece of writing, I'd consider reading it, but I started trying to read it as is, then scrolled down and saw how long it goes on, and I just can't deal with that much text in a glorified chatlog.

I really like RPS, by the way! I just don't like this kind of article.

[Sombre]

I know this is a douchey way to respond, but the format of that article is quite possibly the least appealing way they could possibly have presented that information. If it were an audio discussion, I'd consider listening to it, and if they had taken those comments and turned them into an actual piece of writing, I'd consider reading it, but I started trying to read it as is, then scrolled down and saw how long it goes on, and I just can't deal with that much text in a glorified chatlog.

I really like RPS, by the way! I just don't like this kind of article.

Yeah for sure. I think the most important things they mention is the idea of it seems like an incredibly done, well polished game, and they consider why the RTS genre hasn't evolved this way early. I think Alec Meer argues that in essence, it's just Starcraft, the perfectly refined, balanced RTS standard, except they have infinite money and resources to make it just that little bit better than the recent relic etc games.I've played some actually on the trial, and at various friends houses. It seems really really good, but the barrier for entry, for multiplayer especially seems relatively steep.

Naturally, when the trueskill algorithm comes into play more efficiently after several weeks of the game, it will stablisise, but is there any discrepancies so far you've noticed while playing online? I know it's impossible to "Smurf" in the classical sense, but have you found the multiplayer so far to be fair?

[jennoa]

Yeah for sure. I think the most important things they mention is the idea of it seems like an incredibly done, well polished game, and they consider why the RTS genre hasn't evolved this way early. I think Alec Meer argues that in essence, it's just Starcraft, the perfectly refined, balanced RTS standard, except they have infinite money and resources to make it just that little bit better than the recent relic etc games.I've played some actually on the trial, and at various friends houses. It seems really really good, but the barrier for entry, for multiplayer especially seems relatively steep.

Naturally, when the trueskill algorithm comes into play more efficiently after several weeks of the game, it will stablisise, but is there any discrepancies so far you've noticed while playing online? I know it's impossible to "Smurf" in the classical sense, but have you found the multiplayer so far to be fair?

So far I have been pleasantly surprised by the multiplayer. I've won a game,and lost a couple, but all have been close matches. I never really got into the first Starcraft when it came out, and never tried multiplayer until just the other day. So i guess I would say don't let the perceived barrier of entry deter you.

[Forbin]

I know this is a douchey way to respond, but the format of that article is quite possibly the least appealing way they could possibly have presented that information. If it were an audio discussion, I'd consider listening to it, and if they had taken those comments and turned them into an actual piece of writing, I'd consider reading it, but I started trying to read it as is, then scrolled down and saw how long it goes on, and I just can't deal with that much text in a glorified chatlog.

I really like RPS, by the way! I just don't like this kind of article.

I like that format. I know it can seem a bit douchey, but so do a lot of reviews. People get so focused on writing "well", that a lot of things are left unsaid or come off as rushed opinions. Other than a short news article, this is the first post on a gaming site i've read in it's entirety in a long time.

[Moelman]

scout early, and early pool if you need to. Often you may need to bring your drones in to destroy the pylon. Zerg's got an advantage that the overloard can guard your ramp, so you shouldn't be getting any unexpected pylons if you're paying attention. Also, most players won't attempt a pylon rush if they know they've been spotted, even if they don't know you were too busy to notice them.

Also, once you've thwarted the attack, immediately send zerglings into his base. He'll have invested in a Forge instead of a gateway, and lost a pylon, so you should have the upper hand.

Thanks, I will have to try that the next time it happens, which will probably be soon.

I think after playing a bunch of games yesterday, Battle.net is starting to get a better idea of how good I am. For my first 5 games or so after the placement matches, the opponent was always favored. Now the past five or so, I have been slightly favored in maybe 3 which is nice. I also finally started to win some.

Also, I may have been overreacting about the end of the campaign.

I know that she still had the tendril hair, but I just figured that is because her hair couldn't just magically turn back to real hair. But maybe it's because she is still part Zerg. I have heard several opinions on Shack talking about how she will still control some Zerg but will be teamed up with Raynor. I would probably still have preferred that she stay infested till the end of the Zerg campaign maybe, but I can live with that. Obviously that is just people's ideas and it might not be right but it sounds reasonable.

[Forbin]

yeah battle.net may be a bit sketchy still. My friend and I were both ranked platinum, but together our 2v2 team got put in bronze. 2v2 does take a lot longer to sort out, but I have no place in platinum. I had 4 of my 5 placement matches against other placement people, so the game had no information other than i own newbs who fail at cheese openers.

I was lamenting my poor placement after getting crushed in a platinum match and the guy thought he was being charitable when he forfeited the match. Now i'll just be here longer before getting nocked down to gold :/

I'm really enjoying 3v3 though, my friends share control and we will often micro for each other when money needs to be spent.

[Karimi]

Also, I may have been overreacting about the end of the campaign.

I know that she still had the tendril hair, but I just figured that is because her hair couldn't just magically turn back to real hair. But maybe it's because she is still part Zerg. I have heard several opinions on Shack talking about how she will still control some Zerg but will be teamed up with Raynor. I would probably still have preferred that she stay infested till the end of the Zerg campaign maybe, but I can live with that. Obviously that is just people's ideas and it might not be right but it sounds reasonable.

Im kinda hoping Tychus gets infested and turned. Zombie+Infested+Marine = win

[Forbin]

I give the story a pass. Like Chris said this is something that I'd have found awesome when I was 14, and even though it's corny, it's still a lot better than most games are able to achieve. I think the senior creative team at blizzard is just better at creating grand concepts than it is at characters and dialogue. They're a bunch of gen-x metal heads, and they've grown up a bit, but they still like shit that's a bit over the top.

I wasn't disappointed from the end of the campaign, because it was pretty obvious how things were going to go. I set my expectations a bit lower as soon as I saw the trailer with Raynor drinking from a flask. Though i did enjoy talking to my crew.

[Forbin]

Just finished listening to Chris on Three Moves Ahead talking about SC2.

I feel like everyone was playing Devils Advocate a little too much.

Tom Chick has a serious problem, he's playing the game on normal. The recommendation when you start a new game is that Normal is for people who aren't very experienced with strategy games, and he's not only a long time gamer, but he co-hosts a strategy game podcast. WTF was he thinking, of course the missions are simple to him. Thankfully SC2 allows you to always select the difficulty before you start a mission, I have no idea why Tom didn't ever decide to increase it on his end.

I also greatly dispute his claim that DoW2 or other games are "better" than SC2. I agree that it's something that you should question, but it seems like he's reacting to an assumption with a poorly thought out idea. DoW2 has an embarrassing story line, even compared to starcraft. There are Orcs voice acted like Chavs, and space marines with even bigger shoulder armour than Blizzard is capable of. And in terms of multiplayer, it doesn't really seem to be much of a deep game. Just because something includes cover mechanics and control points, doesn't make is better. Blizzard devs talked about their experimentations with cover mechanics and decided that it detracted from the gameplay, it's not like they were oblivious to developments made in the industry, they just felt they didn't belong in the game. Brood War had a stamp on strategy games that nobody could replace, so the entire industry adapted by building new unique features to try to find a niche. Anybody who tried to go up against SC as a traditional RTS was shot down, not because the gameplay is dated, but because they're trying to compete with a product that is better than whatever they could come up with, no matter how old it was. So when Blizzard returns to the scene, they're expected to pick up these "innovations" as if they were proven to be better?

That's like saying that because someone has invented control points, there's no point in playing capture the flag. There may not be victory points on the maps, but between elevation, grass, xel'naga watch towers and gold expansions, there's enough in the game that intrinsically encourages map control. I'm sorry I liked DoW2, but I don't see how you could say it's a better game than SC2 to anybody other than an absolute Warhammer 40k enthusiast.

If you, like the guys on 3 moves ahead find you're not challenged by the single player, feel that the upgrades aren't meaningful,and feel the missions don't require much dynamic play, then for the love of god up the difficulty. Normal is a great setting, and will probably be best for most people, but hard or even brutal is what you need to be playing if you think it's a cake walk.

[CaptainFish]

I agree one hundred percent, Forbin. Playing on hard, and doing those achievements often requires you to go outside of the basic "battle plan" and it is rewarding as it will weaken the enemy greatly. Also, the order of missions and which upgrades you choose has a strong effect. Playing outbreak as your second mission (which I did in my first playthrough) and playing it after getting siege tanks and perdition turrets (which I did in my second run) makes a huge difference. I didn't use the mercenaries at all in my first playthrough because of a strong upgrade focus, and my second playthrough depended on them, almost exclusively in several missions (

including the Odin stealing one

).

I did really like that everyone says that there is so much variation between games, even just in the realm of RTS. However, Rob (?) took that to mean that Starcraft 2 is less deserving because it represents the roots of RTS, which was weird. It burns me when people forget that SC was the pinnacle of asymmetrical RTS of that original style.

I do think that the alien upgrades aren't really balanced in strengths. In every instance in my second playthrough that I changed my mind to choose the "cooler" option I instantly regretted it because it isn't as useful. A lot of them seem like traps for people who haven't played a lot of SC. They may have a use for people with different playstyles, but I doubt it.

As for the story, it's kinda indefensible. If you're looking for great storytelling with subtlety and literary devices (outside of foreshadowing every second), it's probably not going to be in a blizzard game. We're talking about space truckers, klingon paladins and Kerrigan Ex Machina. There's no nuance there. However, I did like the quality of the presentation, and did not have the same problem with the voice acting as others. It has less plot than the original SC, and most games of similar length and that's a big plus.

[Irishjohn]

As for the story, it's kinda indefensible. If you're looking for great storytelling with subtlety and literary devices (outside of foreshadowing every second), it's probably not going to be in a blizzard game. We're talking about space truckers, klingon paladins and Kerrigan Ex Machina. There's no nuance there. However, I did like the quality of the presentation, and did not have the same problem with the voice acting as others. It has less plot than the original SC, and most games of similar length and that's a big plus.

I agree, it misses that sweet spot where the story could have been cheesy but even more enjoyable because of it. It's just cheesy. I like the campaign most when it reminds me of playing video games in the early to mid-1990s, but then I get a bit sad when I realise that at Blizzard, they still think this stuff is cool. They're not just referencing it, or highlighting stuff that can still feel cool.

I liked a lot of the touches but I felt like I was making allowances way too often. I still enjoyed the single player an awful lot though, and I am actually daring to play multiplayer.

[jennoa]

Wonderful, after working flawlessly since day one, today Starcraft 2 just loads a black screen then crashes. Oh PC gaming, how I love/hate thee.

[Roderick]

After having spent the entire evening with the office playing insane Free For All Starcraft 2 matches, there are some things that came to light.

Firstly, we're all not good enough to finish each other off in the mid-game. So it all inexorably heads to a big clash of Tier 3 units. I want to learn how to crush my opponents with just a choice squad of Hydralisks and Zerglings, not necessarily sit it out until I have fifty Brood Lords or whatever, and I'm up against tenhundred Carriers. What's the deal here? Why can't we finish this? It's true my opponents are mostly turtlers, but I can't seem to break through (Zerg are by definition not turtlers).

It's also apparent that early rushes are pretty easy to avoid by walling off the choke point. Which sucks for me as Zerg of course The few times I can squeeze my Speedlings through there's hell to pay though, I rip his entire economy to shreds. So good!

But I do still feel there's a game in there that I'm not yet playing.

[BigJKO]

I hear Banelings are a good counter to wall-offs.

[Roderick]

Good suggestion! I haven't used it much yet, but will incorporate it in my rush next time. I hope it doesn't delay the rush too long.

[Forbin]

It's called a "baneling bust"

[Karimi]

After having spent the entire evening with the office playing insane Free For All Starcraft 2 matches, there are some things that came to light.

Firstly, we're all not good enough to finish each other off in the mid-game. So it all inexorably heads to a big clash of Tier 3 units. I want to learn how to crush my opponents with just a choice squad of Hydralisks and Zerglings, not necessarily sit it out until I have fifty Brood Lords or whatever, and I'm up against tenhundred Carriers. What's the deal here? Why can't we finish this? It's true my opponents are mostly turtlers, but I can't seem to break through (Zerg are by definition not turtlers).

It's also apparent that early rushes are pretty easy to avoid by walling off the choke point. Which sucks for me as Zerg of course The few times I can squeeze my Speedlings through there's hell to pay though, I rip his entire economy to shreds. So good!

But I do still feel there's a game in there that I'm not yet playing.

The thing about zerg is that your units are essentially always worth half of another race's units. Ie a zealot is worth about 4 zerglings, and so on. So in a battle of 200 cap vs 200 cap you will nearly always lose to protoss and terran (unless you scouted and countered what they were building). What zerg have in their advantage is the ability to pump out units and control the map. You WANT your opponent to turtle, it means you can expand to your hearts desire, you just have to make sure : 1. you're taking advantage of it, spreading creep and expanding, 2. you're upgrading your units - never have more than 500 mins and gas AT ANY TIME 3. You pressure like nobody's business. You can't really let it go to tier 3 , but if it does you've got to make sure they don't have the resources to keep it up .Terran players are starved for gas, if they turtle they can't get enough air units, they can turtle well but your counter to that is a wave of banelings. I've yet to see a base that can't be taken opened up by 20-or-so banelings.

Zerg are very versatile, but pretty much to the point that they are a reactive race, you've always got to be one step ahead, scouting and finding out what your opponent is doing.

[Roderick]

Thank you, those are some very interesting thoughts, especially about the food cap and unit selection.

I have another thing I'd like to discuss: I feel there is a tendency for an air arms race to start in games, and once someone dominates the skies the other players are generally dead. Is that a true observation, or once again a sign that we're not playing 'right'? Air units just seem so much more powerful than ground units due to their manoeuvrability and power.

[Chris]

I give the story a pass. Like Chris said this is something that I'd have found awesome when I was 14, and even though it's corny, it's still a lot better than most games are able to achieve.

I just can't agree. The story elements of StarCraft II are completely unbearable to me. I really find some of these scenes, like the

one where Kerrigan and Zera-Tul meet

to be almost embarrassing to watch in their stupidity and awkwardness. I'm sure it sounds like I'm playing it up for the sake of hyperbole, but I'm really not. I can't remember the last time I found a game's story so poor. I do agree that Dawn of War II's story is certainly no better, but the difference is that Dawn of War II really doesn't have that story front and center at all. Blizzard REALLY wants me to know what's happening in its universe, in a way Relic doesn't seem as obsessed with highlighting.

[Karimi]

Thank you, those are some very interesting thoughts, especially about the food cap and unit selection.

I have another thing I'd like to discuss: I feel there is a tendency for an air arms race to start in games, and once someone dominates the skies the other players are generally dead. Is that a true observation, or once again a sign that we're not playing 'right'? Air units just seem so much more powerful than ground units due to their manoeuvrability and power.

I'll agree that the maneuverability makes them very effective, but you can work wonders with roaches and zerglings in the beginning of the game and once the creep is down hydralisks are monstrous. Terran in particular has the banshee and viking which can go all over the map harassing your expansions, but I think a few overseers and some early scouting can help against that.

One thing I find helps slow down air units is putting the pressure on their main, if they start hitting your expos, a t1 ground army can start knocking at their front door and they'll rush back to defend. Again, as zerg its always about staying ahead of the other guy, you gotta see him putting that starport and figure , alright, he's either gonna go banshees or vikings,I'm gonna build some hydralisks, get overseers and put up a spore colony or two. I'll also see if he's got any defense, if he's walled I'll get some banelings and try to give him something to worry about. If not then run some speedlings and harass his main.

[Chris]

Thank you, those are some very interesting thoughts, especially about the food cap and unit selection.

I have another thing I'd like to discuss: I feel there is a tendency for an air arms race to start in games, and once someone dominates the skies the other players are generally dead. Is that a true observation, or once again a sign that we're not playing 'right'? Air units just seem so much more powerful than ground units due to their manoeuvrability and power.

If you can fully dominate any particular theatre, that's probably bad news for the other guy. If your opponent has tons of air and you don't have a bunch of anti-air, then yeah, you're in trouble. This is why it's important to always be scouting so you know what kind of units your opponent is building. The different races also have very different types of air units.

In even broader terms, if you haven't kept your opponent from both 1) reaching a really high level of tech, and 2) having the time and money to build a bunch of high-level resultant units, and if you haven't also reached that level and that army size, then he's either out-microing you, or you haven't inhibited his progress enough.