HELP! I'm just not into Starcraft 2

Recommended Videos

sagacious

New member
May 7, 2009
484
0
0
In the weeks preceding the release of Starcraft 2, I was very much looking forward to a good RTS. I had very much liked Tiberian sun and Red alert 2 back in the day, but generals, C&C 3, and Red alert 3 had all dissapointed me. So I pre-ordered Starcraft 2.

I had enormous fun (and still do) with the excellent campaign, and the versus AI and cooperative modes are hilariously fun and are nicely challenging without being overwhelming. But when I got into Player vs Player, I quickly began to dislike it.

There are a few reasons I have disliked the competitive side of Starcraft 2,
1-- The opening minutes of the game are almost always the same, probe, probe, pylon, scout, gateway, etc. ( I play protoss)
2-- It is very grind-like to stay on top of your economy, ideally, one queues up one worker at a time, and queues up another the instant that one finishes, so this ends up being that if you don't press 4 then e every 15 seconds, you'll quickly fall behind.
3-- the number of resources are extremely hard to balance. Every game I find myself having either too little minerals, too little vespene, too little supply, too few workers, or too small an army, or too few expansions, etc.
4-- My final complaint is that when you are losing there is fuck all you can do about it, but if you are wining, the game loses all it's challenge, and descends into 1-2 minutes of moping the floor until your opponent decides to throw in the towel.

I suppose that I am more of an FPS mindset where whether you are wining or not, you still are capable of playing, i.e. In starcraft, if your army is destroyed, you can't counter attack, whereas in an FPS, even if they cap your flag, or kill your tank, you can still bounce back.

Lastly, I just want to say that I do like Starcraft 2, and I would like to get into it more, but it's competitive side hasn't yet appealed to me. do you, the escapist have any suggestions as to what I should do? cause halo reach is a long way off, I would like to be playing starcraft 2 until then.

Thanks for reading! (have an internet cookie for making it this far!)
 

migo

New member
Jun 27, 2010
2,697
0
0
Thanks for the rundown. I guess that appeals to some people but I'm pretty sure I'd dislike it for the same reasons.
 

SquirrelPants

New member
Dec 22, 2008
1,729
0
0
Well, you must understand, the reason that StarCraft was so popular in the first place and survived as long as it dud is because it's easy to learn, and impossible to master. The opening minutes of the game can be very varied, if you mix it up a bit. It's hard to have effective strategies that mix it up, but it is POSSIBLE.

Staying on top of your economy isn't too hard, but EVERYONE has trouble with the gas. That's kind of the point, gas is to get your more powerful units out, and you can only pull in so much, unlike with minerals where you can be very rich. Basically staying on top of Econ involves hotkeying all of your buildings properly, and getting units out near-constantly. It's a tough thing to get ahold of, and lots of people have trouble with it, myself included.

The final point just kind of depends on how you play. I like to go for very heavy macro(as in, large armies) so I am capable of defending my base while attacking and pumping out units and such. Again, very hard to master. You might want to stick around the practice league for the whole 50 games, just to learn this stuff better, but if you've already done that or skipped it, I'd recommend watching some strategy videos to learn how to better vary your builds and have cool fights. Other than that I don't really know what to say.
 

Arachon

New member
Jun 23, 2008
1,519
0
0
You know, you don't have to like a game just because it is popular, just find another game to play whilst waiting for Halo: Reach.
 

sagacious

New member
May 7, 2009
484
0
0
SquirrelPants said:
Well, you must understand, the reason that StarCraft was so popular in the first place and survived as long as it dud is because it's easy to learn, and impossible to master.

-snip-

Staying on top of your economy isn't too hard, but EVERYONE has trouble with the gas. That's kind of the point, gas is to get your more powerful units out, and you can only pull in so much, unlike with minerals where you can be very rich.

-snip-
Thanks! You make a few really good points, I guess that's why starcraft is an Esport, and nothing else is.
 

SquirrelPants

New member
Dec 22, 2008
1,729
0
0
sagacious said:
SquirrelPants said:
Well, you must understand, the reason that StarCraft was so popular in the first place and survived as long as it dud is because it's easy to learn, and impossible to master.

-snip-

Staying on top of your economy isn't too hard, but EVERYONE has trouble with the gas. That's kind of the point, gas is to get your more powerful units out, and you can only pull in so much, unlike with minerals where you can be very rich.

-snip-
Thanks! You make a few really good points, I guess that's why starcraft is an Esport, and nothing else is.
Pretty much, yeah. :D

Another thing with Protoss is there is a reason the pylons joke exists. Their units take up a lot of supply, so you have to learn the gentle balance between building pylons and warping in units. It's a tough thing to learn, and part of the reason I don't like playing Protoss.

Related: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5e6eG6bXAQ
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
I see your plight. However, being a friendless cave-hobbit as I am(preciousss Metroidses...) I only play RTS's for the campaign mode, so I guess I'd love this game.
 

The Madman

New member
Dec 7, 2007
4,400
0
0
I love Starcraft 2, and occasionally play online, but honestly... I actually prefer Company of Heroes and Dawn of War 2 multiplayer over that of SC. I find Starcraft 2's frustrating and ultimately repetitive. Fun with friends, to be sure, but not something I play online regularly against strangers. Too many cheap tricks, too much emphasis on how fast you can play as opposed to how smart you can play, and really the key to winning isn't so much tactics as an overwhelming knowledge of every mechanic and counter to each unit.

Which is not bad by any means, and watching the pros play this game, well, its hypnotic. But me, I prefer a bit of time to breath and think. I like being able to micromanage my units to my hearts content and to do things like lay down suppressing fire or call in mortars and the like from afar.

Starcraft 2 *is* a damn good game, but it's just not everyone's cup o tea. No problem with that!
 

sagacious

New member
May 7, 2009
484
0
0
Nieroshai said:
I see your plight. However, being a friendless cave-hobbit as I am(preciousss Metroidses...) I only play RTS's for the campaign mode, so I guess I'd love this game.
The campaign was very good, but I don't know if it alone would be worth 60 bucks. I would say that the campaign alone would definitely be worth 40 bucks, so maybe wait for a price drop?
 

The Stonker

New member
Feb 26, 2009
1,554
0
0
Even tho something is popular then you don't need to like it.
If that was the case then we should all like boy bands and Lady gaga.
 

LokiSuaveHP

New member
Feb 21, 2010
43
0
0
I've had comebacks before, and I've also lost games that I thought I had in the bag. So it isn't impossible, and I say 1v1 this probably happens less. It also comes with a lot of games. I agree, though, and this is after playing WarCraft 3 for a very long time. The early game in WarCraft 3 is more enjoyable to me. Getting a hero very quickly and harassing a base while building up your main force I found a lot more interesting then doing a Zergling rush. I still play SC2, and I play a whole bunch of ladder, (Have the 100 win random icon) and I find the game very enjoyable. But the early game for SC is the way the game was made, and if you don't like it, you can either overlook it to the better parts of the game where you can have game-changers (High Templar, Ravens, a well-timed fungal growth).

Also, you can change it up, have you ever tried a spine crawler rush, a proxy gateway, or anything like that. They are risky plays, but if you want to spice something up and don't worry about losing, then fire away.

I have a gripe with something that you complained about as well. People are dicks when it comes to losing in that game. If you are done; you're done. Don't say GG then wait 10 minutes for me to clean up your base. I will not GG you back. GG = conceding the game and telling your opponent they did a good job of beating you. Just quit, and we can all play another game. Getting missile turrets and siege tanks, or massing photon cannons and trying to mass void rays against three armies and dying after we have to go get siege isn't a GG, it's just you being a prick. If you think you still have a shot at winning, don't say GG, and play on.

Also, Blizzard REALLY needs to fix the "Person is being revealed" and "Person has no forces left." If it is an entire team, that's fine. But I've blown up bases and I know that the guy has an expansion because he isn't being revealed yet. That isn't fair, it should be left to doubt on whether I know that guy is rebuilding or whether he is out of dudes and not part of his team anymore. When all of the town halls are gone, fine. But, if I lose one of my allies who was going void rays, and my opponents don't know if he has another place where he is massing more, then they are still forced to be careful and get AA. It is a cop-out to the team that is winning to let them know that someone is effectively out of the game, it can also change the outcome of games. I know that SC2 was created to be a 1v1 kind of game, but there were good things in WC3 that aren't in this one. Also, not being able to talk to my allies, and only being able to talk in all when someone is DCing? That makes absolutely no sense, I should have time to comment or tell my allies what we're going to do. Rather than sitting around and talking shit, which happens anyway, why don't I have the option to continue chatting to my random allies, or even my friends, since Blizzard wanted to make this such an interactive thing. Okay, this rant was longer than it needed to be....

Buff Neural Parasite
 

TerranReaper

New member
Mar 28, 2009
953
0
0
Depending on the skill level of players and situation, there are moments where you can pull back from a defeat. Often, I see games are awfully one-sided since players will pull off some sort of cheese tactic or just outplays the other player.

If you really insist on playing Starcraft despite your frustrations with it, I suggest getting yourself into the habit of constantly building workers at any moment in the game. Once you've accomplished that, get into the habit of constantly producing units and building more structures to keep churning out units, etc.
 

Keava

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,010
0
0
I found StarCraft's multiplayer to be a very memory based game. You just need to remember everything you do and every unit mix you ever seen or thought about to be successful. There is very little place for actual strategy, planning or tactics, and everything about perfecting the execution. That's what gives the game edge in the competitive depot.
You don't need to actually think much, but more rely on your muscle memory. Slight delay on miss click can often lead to disaster later on, whenever it is not using your Warp Gate cooldown, Nexus Boost, MULE or Queen's Larvas.
If you watch some of the top player replays from Day9, you will see how the win/loss is mostly decided by a single minor mistake.
 

SelectivelyEvil13

New member
Jul 28, 2010
956
0
0
I haven't played Starcraft 2, but this is why I don't bother with online in RTS games. Personally, I just find them my relaxation games, so I like to take my time and play the single player to enjoy myself.

Experiment a little more, and really see what it is that hinders your fun. Is it really just you, or is it that you just aren't enjoying yourself truly because of extraneous factors? I did this before when I used to play online and now I just stick with single player games that I enjoy because that's what works.

So go ahead, give it another go and if the MP portion is just not fulfilling, stick with the single player options abound. RTS online is not for everyone on varying levels, but only you can judge that yourself.
 

Hiphophippo

New member
Nov 5, 2009
3,509
0
0
I'm about half interested in the single player campaign, but the multiplayer, as you've described it, pretty well is the reason I could not care less about it.