Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

RTS WarCraft 3 gets a huge patch; showmatch/tournament soon; possible remaster?

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Edit: Also, I like your idea of a new campaign. After I see if they're going to announce anything tomorrow or wednesday, I'm thinking of replaying through RoC and TFT campaigns again. Probably my favorite RTS campaigns ever.
Recently beat them on Hard for the first time. I consider myself rather good at RTSes and yet WC3 was causing me grief. Interestingly enough the final mission with Illidan, Vashj and Kael wasn't as hard as Slaughter the humans before they escape! or that bloody siege of Lordaeron with Balnazzar and his happy green friends. Took me a while to just learn to plop 40 towers at each expo and defend with hero until you can get 3 saturated bases and slowly get up to High Upkeep and 100/100 something. Still, some missions really suck even if you try that, e.g. Kael's second mission forces you to storm a fully furnished UD base without any siege units, with a handful of Naga you can't regain if they die, and the enemy base has I think a Pit Lord and a Lich at level 9. I ended up waiting for the enemy to move out with his army of wyrms and a hero and attacked his base while he ravaged mine.
Also I'm kind of terrible at managing 100/100 fights because units kinda blend together too much. Whenever I would go up against something like Garg/Destro/Wyrm or those wretched Couatl that plague the Night Elf campaign, they would carpet-cover my entire army and I would have a ridiculously hard time finding my own units.

Still it felt like a huge accomplishment to get through this whole thing, especially since I beat the final UD mission in my second try, with some decisive attacks and a race to the final obelisk that I won against Illidan by a second. It's IMHO the hardest Blizzard campaign and probably one of the harder RTS campaigns as a whole.

I definitely remember some missions being a giant pain in the ass, but they usually seemed to provide unique experiences and the story was actually somewhat engaging. I look forward to diving into the challenge soon! Maybe I'll let you know how it goes lol

By the way, another thing I've been thinking of doing is replaying the campaign of my first PC game, from which my avatar on here is from: WarCraft II. Ah, the nostalgia.
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Oh man, WC3 campaigns. Is there any shame that when I decided to replay on hard, I could never get past the fifth mission, the one with the timed defense? Seriously, the Undead have never-ending numbers and their heroes are like level 8-10, wtf.

I have to say, it's been so long I'm fuzzy on what happened specifically in the campaign. I'm assuming it's during the RoC Human campaign with Arthas?

I've replayed a bit of the WC2 campaign today. So far so good... althought it's incredibly easy so far. I'm going to rush through it then continue into a playthrough of WC3 RoC and TFT. Maybe I should make my own little thread and post a writeup of anything interesting that happens...

Edit: Also, no, there's no shame in that. I'm not sure it'll be any better for me this time around--but I'm determined to beat it again lol
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Sooo warcraft 4 is coming. Lets hope that it doesn't look shit like SC2.

I don't think they would invest so much time into carefully rebalancing and adding features if they were releasing a sequel. Also, this invitational is actually at Blizzard HQ. Also, SC Remaster was preceded by several patches like 1.29 for WC3, basically implementing most features that were to be included in SCR.

All that said, looks more like a WC3 Remaster announcement is coming soon.
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,083
Location
Bulgaria
Sooo warcraft 4 is coming. Lets hope that it doesn't look shit like SC2.

I don't think they would invest so much time into carefully rebalancing and adding features if they were releasing a sequel. Also, this invitational is actually at Blizzard HQ. Also, SC Remaster was preceded by several patches like 1.29 for WC3, basically implementing most features that were to be included in SCR.

All that said, looks more like a WC3 Remaster announcement is coming soon.
Most likely they are testing the waters to see if there is a market for the game. I am not saying that it will be revealed tomorrow or something.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
637
Location
Kangaroo Island
The Warcraft 3 invitational is live right now if anybody wants to watch it


Edit: Wow, the Korean WC3 pros are on the couch and speaking English. SC pros wouldn't even try.
 
Last edited:

Lagi

Savant
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
726
Location
Desert
Beware, here comes heresy;
I would like to play Warcraft 3 without exping heroes.
they could be available, just let the combats was not for feeding them with xp. Not sure how to reconcile it with leveling [each time they die they level? buy level with gold? the more game time pass, you auto-gain exp/level?].
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Closest thing I could find for ya: No More Heroes Mod, but it's old and not updated (from 2005) and only for RoC. Your only chance (if it even works) might be rolling back to an older version of the game (assuming you have the CD version). There was also a map someone was making, but they never finished it (and it would be a pretty time consuming process if you wanted to make the map for yourself).

Just curious: what makes you want heroes who don't gain XP? I don't think PvP combat in WC3 is for feeding heroes XP; to my knowledge that only happens if one of the players makes a mistake or is totally outmatched.
 

Lagi

Savant
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
726
Location
Desert
WC3 combat orbit around heroes, if you dont have hero nearby, you dont start combat, otherwise you lose exp.
you dont do harassment attack of enemy base without heroes for the same purpose. I mean, you could, but with heroes even standing nearby is much more profitable.
and you dont want enemy player to exp his heroes on your troops, so you retreat [you dont gain XP+ enemy gain XP = double penalty if you dont use hero].
and even the concept of PvE. You dont fight critters to f.ex. gain gold exp access without hero.

and Hero could gain XP, just other way. So the gameplay is closer to starcraft or w2.
========
heroes as single awesome unit, are very welcome, but I prefer hero be more like in starcraft campaign mission. I know that VIP units in old-rts campaign, tend to be "put him inside walls, to not die" and use normal forces.

all above is just my taste. W3 is very good game. Much better balanced than SC:BW....

[your Heresy Points has depleted, wait for some Hate to fill the bar]
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
WC3 combat orbit around heroes, if you dont have hero nearby, you dont start combat, otherwise you lose exp.
you dont do harassment attack of enemy base without heroes for the same purpose. I mean, you could, but with heroes even standing nearby is much more profitable.
and you dont want enemy player to exp his heroes on your troops, so you retreat [you dont gain XP+ enemy gain XP = double penalty if you dont use hero].
and even the concept of PvE. You dont fight critters to f.ex. gain gold exp access without hero.

and Hero could gain XP, just other way. So the gameplay is closer to starcraft or w2.
========
heroes as single awesome unit, are very welcome, but I prefer hero be more like in starcraft campaign mission. I know that VIP units in old-rts campaign, tend to be "put him inside walls, to not die" and use normal forces.

all above is just my taste. W3 is very good game. Much better balanced than SC:BW....

[your Heresy Points has depleted, wait for some Hate to fill the bar]

I agree with your assessment of the game. I'm sure there's games that have more static heroes incorporated into armies, although I can't think of one at the moment. Maybe something like Sacrifice?

Only heresy I've noticed is that you said WC3 is better balanced than SCBW! That doesn't make much sense to me at all. SCBW didn't even get balance changes in SC Remaster, while WC3 (despite being the younger game) just got balance changes a week ago and it's still not entirely done being balanced. Not to mention that SCBW is pretty well known for being the most balanced competitive RTS to ever exist, at least for one with 3 distinct races.

Edit: to give an example, this is the most commonly played map among non-professional gamers, and these statistics are based on recorded professional games (televised in Korea) played on said map.

Fighting Spirit
 

Dzupakazul

Arbiter
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
707
Only heresy I've noticed is that you said WC3 is better balanced than SCBW! That doesn't make much sense to me at all. SCBW didn't even get balance changes in SC Remaster, while WC3 (despite being the younger game) just got balance changes a week ago and it's still not entirely done being balanced. Not to mention that SCBW is pretty well known for being the most balanced competitive RTS to ever exist, at least for one with 3 distinct races.

Edit: to give an example, this is the most commonly played map among non-professional gamers, and these statistics are based on recorded professional games (televised in Korea) played on said map.

Fighting Spirit
I think about the only argument anyone might have about SCBW's balance is that it's often dictated by maps. Zerg has trouble on maps without an easy third gas, there was an infamous case for imbalance on a map called Holy World where an innocent Command Center in the middle could be infested by Zerg and it turns out that Infested Terrans are actually really strong in ZvP, and for the longest time the map pool favored Terran somewhat because of easily tankable cliffs at expansions on some maps (Lost Temple is of course the most famous offender). Also, island maps like classic Dire Straits are a bit of a shitshow, mainly for Zerg, who are really bad in that environment (hence why nobody plays island maps competitively much anymore, unless it's a semi-island situation with crafty usage of blocking neutral buildings and minerals).

Ofc, conversely, I imagine that the infamous UD vs Orc problem pre-BM nerf is only pronounced further if you, for example, have starting positions where the UD can't efficiently wall off his Acolytes.

Unless, of course, the venerable poster above bought into the Tesagi meme.
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Only heresy I've noticed is that you said WC3 is better balanced than SCBW! That doesn't make much sense to me at all. SCBW didn't even get balance changes in SC Remaster, while WC3 (despite being the younger game) just got balance changes a week ago and it's still not entirely done being balanced. Not to mention that SCBW is pretty well known for being the most balanced competitive RTS to ever exist, at least for one with 3 distinct races.

Edit: to give an example, this is the most commonly played map among non-professional gamers, and these statistics are based on recorded professional games (televised in Korea) played on said map.

Fighting Spirit
I think about the only argument anyone might have about SCBW's balance is that it's often dictated by maps. Zerg has trouble on maps without an easy third gas, there was an infamous case for imbalance on a map called Holy World where an innocent Command Center in the middle could be infested by Zerg and it turns out that Infested Terrans are actually really strong in ZvP, and for the longest time the map pool favored Terran somewhat because of easily tankable cliffs at expansions on some maps (Lost Temple is of course the most famous offender). Also, island maps like classic Dire Straits are a bit of a shitshow, mainly for Zerg, who are really bad in that environment (hence why nobody plays island maps competitively much anymore, unless it's a semi-island situation with crafty usage of blocking neutral buildings and minerals).

Ofc, conversely, I imagine that the infamous UD vs Orc problem pre-BM nerf is only pronounced further if you, for example, have starting positions where the UD can't efficiently wall off his Acolytes.

Unless, of course, the venerable poster above bought into the Tesagi meme.

It's true that there's an argument to be made about SCBW's balance being dictated by maps: the maps are why the game can be constantly changing, but remain very balanced. In other words, the underlying balance between races is solid enough for people to have made hundreds of maps for thousands of professional, televised matches, while almost always maintaining parity between the races.

As to Zerg having trouble on maps without an easy third gas, that would really depend on the situation for the other two races, but yeah, that's generally problematic, especially in ZvT. Regardless, there's not that many maps that have been played professionally for very long that didn't have near 50/50 winrate. As I showed with Fighting Spirit, the map currently and for the past several years played the most by amateurs, progamers have played over 1000 televised matches, with winrates standing at these percentages:

TvZ: 148-139 (51.6%)
ZvP: 134-117 (53.4%)
PvT: 143-137 (51.1%)

That map is and has been almost exclusively the map played by amateurs, so there's almost no balance issues regarding the races or the map pool for the common player. It's actually incredibly difficult to get a game on any map besides Fighting Spirit. Circuit Breaker is probably the second most played map, and it had these winrates in professional play:

TvZ: 64-57 (52.9%)
ZvP: 59-55 (51.8%)
PvT: 71-63 (53%)

Another thing that should be addressed is the skill of the players at the time. When people claimed Terrans dominated and blamed maps (btw, LT is fairly balanced if you look at the stats), was it the map? Or the players like Boxer and NTT and ilovoov? When the Six Dragons were dominating, was it the maps favoring Toss or Toss needing a nerf, or those guys being badasses? I think it's generally agreed that the maps weren't the issue. With experience it's not too hard for a high level player to see the problems and imbalances in a map. For pro's they see that shit almost instantly. Imba maps were discarded pretty quickly in Proleague afaik.

As for Holy World, I don't imagine Infested Terrans having much impact on a professional match... although it would be a possibility. It's pretty funny to think of someone not thinking of the CC being there and then seeing their face when one blows up in their mineral line or whatever lol.. But the map only had 24 matches played on it in professional play, and no one played it outside of that... so it's not entirely relevant

And yeah, island maps blow, although they've been used pretty frequently in proleague. I hate them, and, on top of that, I'm a zerg player -.-


One last thing, I should be halfway through my WC2 playthrough tonight. Gonna post the first half tonight or tomorrow. I should be starting the WC3 let's play on Friday. Since those campaigns are so much longer I'll probably be doing that one more episodically than this one. Any suggestions or requests? From you or anyone really :)
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Oh, and I should add that I have almost no idea about WC3 balance or even strategies. I just know that it's being heavily reworked and rebalanced, while SCBW has absolutely no noticeable balance issues. So the claim that it's more balanced than SCBW (or that anything is more balanced than SCBW while also maintaining the same level of complexity/variety) is wrong in my view, or at least suspicious sounding lol
 

Dzupakazul

Arbiter
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
707
Another thing that should be addressed is the skill of the players at the time. When people claimed Terrans dominated and blamed maps (btw, LT is fairly balanced if you look at the stats), was it the map? Or the players like Boxer and NTT and ilovoov?

Quite recently there's been a resurgence of purported true oldschool BW players who believe that SC was broken from the start (the Tesagi phenomenon, i.e. that Terran is basically the best race in the game) and there have even been threads on TL itself that called for nerf to SCVs or Vultures for being too cost-effective. After 20 years these people come out of the woodwork after some alleged serious comments from some progamers that Terran is somewhat broken. I don't believe in it, but the argument is helped by how Flash is currently the absolute best BW player alive, how most prolific players and Bonjwas were T, and that the appropriate way of dealing with the mech switch in ZvT is still kinda shaky for most players. Also, Jaedong retired due to fucked up hands and there are very few good Protosses remaining. I still believe that if/when Flash retires, BW (or what remains of it) will be the age of the Zerg, they have by far the most strong representation and although the issues with ZvP have been mostly addressed thanks to Bisu (who really disappointed me in the ASL4 with some poor tactical decisions and never bothering to target clumps of tanks with Storm), it's still a difficult matchup for Toss.
When the Six Dragons were dominating, was it the maps favoring Toss or Toss needing a nerf, or those guys being badasses? I think it's generally agreed that the maps weren't the issue. With experience it's not too hard for a high level player to see the problems and imbalances in a map. For pro's they see that shit almost instantly. Imba maps were discarded pretty quickly in Proleague afaik.
Most people contrast the era of the Six Dragons with the fact that there has been no Bonjwa among Protosses, unless you count Bisu as an honorary one for his PvZ revolution and overall valor.

ChaDargo said:
As for Holy World, I don't imagine Infested Terrans having much impact on a professional match... although it would be a possibility.
It caused a bit of a stir once. Protoss simply has no (known) response to the ITs (Dragoons fire too slowly and require 6 shots to take care of one IT). This probably contributed to the relatively low popularity of the map. I suppose one solution would be to opt for a quick destruction of the CC in the middle before Queen tech, but I can't imagine this not causing some problems with overextension...
And yeah, island maps blow, although they've been used pretty frequently in proleague. I hate them, and, on top of that, I'm a zerg player -.-
I don't suppose you just love ZvZ like the rest of our wonderful slimy brethren? Zerg main here as well.
One last thing, I should be halfway through my WC2 playthrough tonight. Gonna post the first half tonight or tomorrow. I should be starting the WC3 let's play on Friday. Since those campaigns are so much longer I'll probably be doing that one more episodically than this one. Any suggestions or requests? From you or anyone really :)
I think I once saw a playthrough of the infamous "hold the line" mission in RoC Human which wiped out all the bases on the map instead of choosing to hold on, and supposedly the game is coded to accomodate for such an event. Aside from that take your time, Hard WC3 took me an hour of in-game time to complete each mission, and some of the hardest ones (King Arthas) a couple hours more.

And also, just to make sure that it's clear: I do believe SCBW's 1v1 balance is at an equilibrium; I'm mostly trying to address some concerns for this not being the case ahead of time.
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Another thing that should be addressed is the skill of the players at the time. When people claimed Terrans dominated and blamed maps (btw, LT is fairly balanced if you look at the stats), was it the map? Or the players like Boxer and NTT and ilovoov?

Quite recently there's been a resurgence of purported true oldschool BW players who believe that SC was broken from the start (the Tesagi phenomenon, i.e. that Terran is basically the best race in the game) and there have even been threads on TL itself that called for nerf to SCVs or Vultures for being too cost-effective. After 20 years these people come out of the woodwork after some alleged serious comments from some progamers that Terran is somewhat broken. I don't believe in it, but the argument is helped by how Flash is currently the absolute best BW player alive, how most prolific players and Bonjwas were T, and that the appropriate way of dealing with the mech switch in ZvT is still kinda shaky for most players. Also, Jaedong retired due to fucked up hands and there are very few good Protosses remaining. I still believe that if/when Flash retires, BW (or what remains of it) will be the age of the Zerg, they have by far the most strong representation and although the issues with ZvP have been mostly addressed thanks to Bisu (who really disappointed me in the ASL4 with some poor tactical decisions and never bothering to target clumps of tanks with Storm), it's still a difficult matchup for Toss.
When the Six Dragons were dominating, was it the maps favoring Toss or Toss needing a nerf, or those guys being badasses? I think it's generally agreed that the maps weren't the issue. With experience it's not too hard for a high level player to see the problems and imbalances in a map. For pro's they see that shit almost instantly. Imba maps were discarded pretty quickly in Proleague afaik.
Most people contrast the era of the Six Dragons with the fact that there has been no Bonjwa among Protosses, unless you count Bisu as an honorary one for his PvZ revolution and overall valor.

ChaDargo said:
As for Holy World, I don't imagine Infested Terrans having much impact on a professional match... although it would be a possibility.
It caused a bit of a stir once. Protoss simply has no (known) response to the ITs (Dragoons fire too slowly and require 6 shots to take care of one IT). This probably contributed to the relatively low popularity of the map. I suppose one solution would be to opt for a quick destruction of the CC in the middle before Queen tech, but I can't imagine this not causing some problems with overextension...
And yeah, island maps blow, although they've been used pretty frequently in proleague. I hate them, and, on top of that, I'm a zerg player -.-
I don't suppose you just love ZvZ like the rest of our wonderful slimy brethren? Zerg main here as well.
One last thing, I should be halfway through my WC2 playthrough tonight. Gonna post the first half tonight or tomorrow. I should be starting the WC3 let's play on Friday. Since those campaigns are so much longer I'll probably be doing that one more episodically than this one. Any suggestions or requests? From you or anyone really :)
I think I once saw a playthrough of the infamous "hold the line" mission in RoC Human which wiped out all the bases on the map instead of choosing to hold on, and supposedly the game is coded to accomodate for such an event. Aside from that take your time, Hard WC3 took me an hour of in-game time to complete each mission, and some of the hardest ones (King Arthas) a couple hours more.

And also, just to make sure that it's clear: I do believe SCBW's 1v1 balance is at an equilibrium; I'm mostly trying to address some concerns for this not being the case ahead of time.

Any of these players claiming this nonsense happen to be good at the game? SC foreigner scene has a propensity for ridiculousness and cockiness that's fairly singular in its intensity lol I think it's because they never play versus anyone from Korea on a consistent basis. I mean, some of that stuff you cited that they say sounds like incontrol trolling Artosis

Oh well, Brood War is pretty dead so it's sort of all moot anyways.
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas

I had my suspicions, but I tend to try to be nice to people... With that in mind, I'll resist the urge to analyze his comments in those threads.
:dealwithit:

Also, good to see a staunch defender of the best game ever made. I wish we could have the pre-SC2 community back. I never bought remastered for a variety of reasons (not boycotting or something), and now my internet is not quite up to speed to play even the free client I don't think. Definitely couldn't play with the Koreans, which would probably be the main draw for me at this point. Both because of lag and because, didn't they shut down Fish?

I don't even like looking into it because it makes me aggravated lol
 

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
It caused a bit of a stir once. Protoss simply has no (known) response to the ITs
That was hilarious, d-web was pretty genius, didn't expect that lol To be fair, though, it is Zero playing ZvP, which isn't fair even without some weird gimmick!

I don't suppose you just love ZvZ like the rest of our wonderful slimy brethren? Zerg main here as well.
I can say that I love playing every matchup except TvT, and even that one is pretty damn fun all things considered. Just in small doses.

ZvZ doesn't bother me too much, although when I'm out of practice I tend to PvZ since that's less likely to make me upset at some little oversight or miss-micro losing me the game. Whenever I would get really down about ZvZ being "random" or whatever pops into one's head after losing the strangest matchup in the game... I would think of this statistic and realize I'm just being a pussy:

"ZvZ: 164-61 (72.89%)"

I'm sure you can guess who that belongs to.
 

Lagi

Savant
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
726
Location
Desert
Only heresy I've noticed is that you said WC3 is better balanced than SCBW!
...
stats
Yes that's why, My opinion is strongly at variance with establishment. And I'm not trying to be edgy here. Maybe the word "balance" is different understood by us. a situation in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions

Each race in SC1 has equal chance to win - agree, all Korean pros, map-stats confirm that. Race balance is unsurpassed.
Bur SC1 has many underused and overused units, upgrades and tactics - among same race. Which streamline the game into using narrower amount of solution.
f.ex
underused: firebat, optic flare - its very situational or used for fun
overused: siegetank, stimpack+medic - its a MUST in every game

I can choose or omit any of W3 units, and this way of playing can be viable, unless maybe some pro level, that everyone here appears to be at - but i'm not following e-sport, nor i'm interested on receiving brain-damage from any "competitive" community.
 

Dzupakazul

Arbiter
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
707
underused: firebat, optic flare - its very situational or used for fun
Plenty of units and skills like this in WC3 as well. Look at Necromancer. Terrific spellcaster on paper, Cripple is a great debuff. Not played ever, because skeleton spam gets countered by a Wand of Negation rather simply. Firebat still owns the shit out of heavy Zergling all-ins and is meant, very specifically, to be a specialist unit, dispatched on very specific missions. Even if you gave the Firebat normal damage, it would still be liable to getting kited or simply destroyed by siege. As it stands, Firebats are really good for killing Zerglings, Zealots in team games (where you often go M&M), tanking Sunken Colonies when doing early Sunken busts, and for dropping into mineral lines to kill peons.
On the flipside: Look at how poor the Night Elf early game is, with Archers being an overall crappy, stepping-stone unit and Huntresses having lost much of their allure as a massing unit. Or look at how underused Hippogryph Riders are.
Even Humans, who are generally well balanced, don't see too many Riflemen simply because they become irrelevant in a DH/BM meta. Somewhat akin to how you almost never see infantry units in TvT and TvP because Marines quickly become outdated in the face of powerful AoE splash damage siege fire or spells such as Psionic Storm.
And heroes? Just look at the WC3 Night Elf meta where Demon Hunter is the best starting hero ever and the other three are almost irrelevant to the point where Nelfs generally prefer to hire the second hero from the tavern, with the Warden being notorious for her very high skill cap and thus unwieldiness that makes her a not very reliable pick.
Look at how Orc was infamous for being "Blademaster and Friends", where it's obvious 90% of the impact on the game is from BM bonanza.
Look at how troublesome UD in general was, and how little Dreadlord brought into play because in spite of a powerful level 6, he's hardly ever picked over the standard coil/nova because he gets shit on, and UD meta has been considered stale and one-note for many years now.
Your old post also asserted that underused units are:
which have recently had a massive resurgence in ZvT because they allow for a fairly cost-effective sweep of Siege Tanks in case of heavy mech play from the Terran,
which we all agree on, but bear in mind that Scouts are actually strong units if there's heavy air-play. And there often isn't. Still, Scouts would be plenty viable for killing something like mass Battlecruisers or Carriers. The meta simply isn't oriented much about those.
Corsair with 5 dmg is only useful due to Web.
Web is almost never researched because it's unwieldy and fairly low-impact in most hands. What you build Corsairs for is PvZ because they're cheap, fast, and absolutely ruin any Muta based play, and they're almost always guaranteed to kill off at least 1 Overlord. Corsairs are a staple PvZ unit and are honestly in every PvZ game.
valkyries, devourer
The Fantasy build in TvZ was specifically made to include Valkyrie against Zerg because Valkyrie puts on a ton of pressure, killing Overlords and handily countering Mutalisk play once Valkyrie get larger in numbers. Valkyrie's use has skyrocketed since this invention. Valks are also not bad in case of heavy Wraith play in TvT as support units. As for Devourers, they're a viable spenditure to get some use out of your Mutalisks after their window of opportunity has been exhausted. I like using Devourers in ZvP because I'm, personally, garbage at dealing with Corsairs, and Devourers are really strong against those. Devourers are also strong in the event of extremely late-game ZvZ, because Mutalisks are a staple unit there, and Devourer splash attack + debuff is genuinely really scary in those engagements.
Citadel of Aldun being filler structure with solely purpose to delay access to Templars and archons is remarkable sample of great design
You also make CoA for the Zealot Leg Enhancement, which is a vital upgrade for all sorts of timing pushes and for overall increasing your Zealots' viability in the late game. Very often you have Leg Enhancements researching while TA is still being created. That's like complaining that Barracks in many TvP and TvT games only exist to force you to delay Factory.
Everone who praise BCruisers for their Yamato gun "oh how lovely it destroys that tower from safe distance",
That's not the primary purpose of Yamato Gun. The primary purpose of YG is to use in heavy Battlecruiser vs Battlecruiser fights, and to snipe units like in heavy fortified Siege Tank positions without putting your BCs in jeopardy from Gols and Turrets. You can even use them to shut down an expansion, as a few Yamato Guns simply eradicate CCs. Battlecruisers are a really good unit in late-game TvT, as it's often the only stalemate breaker in this heavily positional matchup.
should be nuked by ghost together with their eco- turtled bases. BC are one big resource dumpster.
So are Ghosts and their Nukes. Nukes are painfully situational and a high-risk-medium reward play in many cases. You have to take a detour for Ghosts which don't have a lot of room in many games where you rely on making a ton of Factories and Starports rather than Barracks. Ghosts cost high gas for what they are. Ghosts are poor DPSers. Lockdown is micro-intensive. Nukes cost 8 Supply and quite a hefty mineral/gas cost and they're liable to simply whiff the moment the Ghost dies.
carriers are perfectly balance
Yes, they are. They're only particularly notable in PvT, where they are tricky to deal with for Terrans. PvP? Arbiter Stasis Field + Psionic Storm + just mass Dragoons (which are a staple of PvP) completely annihilate them, and you're almost never reaching a critical mass of Carriers in PvP anyway because they're a resource dumpster. PvZ? Plague destroys them. Dark Swarm renders Interceptors useless while Hydralisks plonk away at the Carriers. Devourers kill them while being cheaper. Carriers, in general, are really poor units on maps with open fields because they rely on being outside of everyone else's LoS while the Interceptors cause mayhem. Even if a map is particularly cliffy, mishandling your Carriers means you will lose them to concentrated Goliath fire or whatever else is there.

Did anyone remember Zerg game without Mutas?
Plenty. It's common to not go Mutas in ZvT if you are not comfortable with your Mutalisk micro, and going 3 Hatch Lurker is plenty viable in such an event. Heavy Muta harass based builds in ZvP have fallen out of favor because of Corsairs. ZvZ is the only matchup that sees Mutalisks in every game.

overused: siegetank
Yes, it's a staple unit for anchoring on positions, overall defense, and, well, sieges. They also suck shit in small numbers and without support from other units they are sitting ducks. Why is it wrong to have a staple mid-game unit, again? Why are you not complaining that there are virtually no SC games without Zealots or Zerglings being made throughout the entire game?
stimpack+medic - its a MUST in every game
It isn't. You just do not go for excessive infantry at all in TvP or TvT. You make enough Marines in TvP to defend against Zealot rushes at most, and you make maybe like 1 Marine to kill off scouting SCVs in TvT. Any infantry-heavy strategies in either of those matchups are considered cheese due to how infantry-based play straight up ends the moment the opponent gets to his Advanced Buildings tech.

I can choose or omit any of W3 units, and this way of playing can be viable, unless maybe some pro level, that everyone here appears to be at - but i'm not following e-sport, nor i'm interested on receiving brain-damage from any "competitive" community.
I'm afraid that what you're attempting to say isn't "heresy". You didn't come here with a strong understanding of what you're talking about, and you just openly admitted that not only do you really not care how the game is played in multiplayer, but that "brain-damage" comment is probably meant to give you some sort of sense of superiority over people who actually research and play the games. You are not Martin Luther hammering his 95 theses to a door of a church. You are acting like a Flat Earther at a SpaceX convention.
 
Last edited:

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
Only heresy I've noticed is that you said WC3 is better balanced than SCBW!
...
stats
Yes that's why, My opinion is strongly at variance with establishment. And I'm not trying to be edgy here. Maybe the word "balance" is different understood by us. a situation in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions

Each race in SC1 has equal chance to win - agree, all Korean pros, map-stats confirm that. Race balance is unsurpassed.
Bur SC1 has many underused and overused units, upgrades and tactics - among same race. Which streamline the game into using narrower amount of solution.
f.ex
underused: firebat, optic flare - its very situational or used for fun
overused: siegetank, stimpack+medic - its a MUST in every game

I can choose or omit any of W3 units, and this way of playing can be viable, unless maybe some pro level, that everyone here appears to be at - but i'm not following e-sport, nor i'm interested on receiving brain-damage from any "competitive" community.
Oh, okay. Well that's not as strange of a statement to me, although I couldn't check the veracity of it until I read Dzupakazal's post (vis-a-vis the WC3 aspects). Just to clarify, I'm not part of a competitive community and teaming up with one or against someone. I have no interest in belittling you even if some of your views irk me. At most I'd like to give you some knowledge, but I'm not going to force that down your throat.

Just a little background:

I played with Koreans most of my time playing SCBW and I don't even speak Korean except for a few phrases (and when I was most active I mostly relied on my live-in, half-Korean girlfriend to translate). That is to say, it was nice not being able to have much shit-talk going in or out of games, and to learn by watching and playing and not theorycrafting. Of course, there were a lot of "white boy" and "u like hamburger?" types of people, but mostly the language barrier kept shit simple.

Point is, I can relate. I'm not a fan of getting brain-damage from bullshit communities either.
 
Last edited:

ChaDargo

Arcane
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
425
Location
Texas
I can choose or omit any of W3 units, and this way of playing can be viable, unless maybe some pro level, that everyone here appears to be at - but i'm not following e-sport, nor i'm interested on receiving brain-damage from any "competitive" community.
I'm afraid that what you're attempting to say isn't "heresy". You didn't come here with a strong understanding of what you're talking about, and you just openly admitted that not only do you really not care how the game is played in multiplayer, but that "brain-damage" comment is probably meant to give you some sort of sense of superiority over people who actually research and play the games. You are not Martin Luther hammering his 95 theses to a door of a church. You are acting like a Flat Earther at a SpaceX convention.

I agree with all of your points completely regarding SCBW. I was actually going to quote most of what you replied to and then just type "lol" to each one, because they're so wrong and sometimes the exact opposite of the truth.

But I think a part of Lagi's problem is that he's used to being belittled and shit on. Theorycrafting in the foreigner scene is ridiculous, and the amount of nonsensical shit discussed on forums or chatrooms by people who aren't even competitive against amateurs from Korea... It can be both baffling and smell of bullshit to a newcomer. I think that the bullshit has been a major factor in the non-Korean scene being so small. There's an illusion that SCBW is some sort of extremely difficult, elite game inaccessible to beginners, and it's in great part due to the fact that a lot of veteran players present the game as such.

In other words, I think Lagi is simply being reactionary and defensive. Yes, he's wrong, and he should investigate what he's talking about and not just pop off with weird opinions. But I can't really blame him for it. Why should he invest energy into learning more when the possibility of getting "brain-damage" (i.e., getting shit on and harassed for being bad or wrong) is so high? It's not that common to find someone willing to just respectfully break things down like you did, right?

Then again, maybe he's just pretentious. I guess I'm just trying to find some middle ground :love:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom