When writing up all of the different lists of greatest players of SC2, I realized that I had never expounded upon what I meant when I talk about the relative strength of a player’s strength compared to their relative scene, as well as the overall increasing strength of the player base from the end of 2010 to now.
When thinking about trying to quantify something as broad and vague as this. First I wrote down important moments when there were large strategic or tactical developments that impacted SC2 on a large level. In this case, it wasn't enough to create a new style or build, but it would have to become immediately widespread and eventually become rote in the meta. In this case San's High Templar PvT or Thorzain's mass Thor strategy do not count. Both were unique to the player, but both strategies were nerfed almost immediately upon their revelation before it made any impact on the player base. This also means niche builds that weren't widely used or map specific weren't considered (like Catz's gold base ZvP builds or Scarlett's mass muta into broodlords ZvZ).
Strategic and Tactical Revolutions through SC2
Zerg
For Zerg, NesTea was the most important player when it came to understanding the fundamentals of the race, particularly larvae management and how that affects economic/positional development across the map. Beyond that the most important player to Zerg's development as a race was Life. Yes Stephano had the largest impact of any player, but his metas and compositions (the most important of which all revolved around the infestor) were nerfed in HotS.
On the other hand, Life's most important contribution to the Zerg was the tactical revolution in all three matchups. His style of aggression and more importantly counter-aggression changed every Zerg matchup when it came to the positional and tactical decisions any player had to make. While no one ever perfectly emulated Life's style of SC2, his tactical plays became part of the basic fundamentals of Zerg play that every player would include to some extent in their repertoire.
Protoss
For the Protoss race, MC was the most important player because much like NesTea, he built the cornerstone of the Protoss race, specifically the understanding of force-fields and warp prism mechanics.
When it came to PvP, there were two strategic and tactical revolutions that occurred in SC2. The first was by Rain who taught the world how to always transition into late game PvP, the exact unit composition you can make, and how to engage in PvP. Afterwards, sOs had a very large impact in 2013 (though much like Stephano the stuff he made lasted about an year before Zergs had adjusted), while later on it was Zest in 2014 who had an even better understanding of tactical positioning and how that affected and interacted with all of the build orders in PvP.
Tactically however, the most important player was most likely PartinG. In the most important PvT series ever played against jjakji, he unveiled his 2 base storm build (Set 1, Set 2). While the build is now defunct because it can't hold against MMMM, the real things to take from that series was his use of flanking storms, retreating storms, and how the HT would be implemented into the Protoss army (before him, they were always added on at the end as they were too complex tactically for other Protoss to get immediately).
Terran
Terran is an exception to the rule. The other races had one early player create the building blocks of the race while new players would come in with either strategic or tactical revolutions. In Terran's case Mvp did both. He created the founding blocks of macro play for Terran players for both Bio and Mech. Tactically he showed every Terran player how to play end-game TvT. He created the SCV pull against Protoss, he made and got nerfed mass ghosts, and most importantly he made hellion/banshee into the triple CC (The single most important TvZ build ever made in SC2).
Besides Mvp, the most important players to the Terran race were MKP and Polt. MKPs creation of the marine split has immense tactical and strategic effects on TvZ for the rest of SC2. In Polt's case, he played tactically the most important TvT of all time in 2011. On Metalopolis against MMA(Link), he used the standard Marine/tank composition. But he used it aggressively as he attacked entrenched positions over and over again with split marines against tank lines. That single map changed the very basic rules of unit interaction in TvT for the rest of time and had immense tactical reverberations that eventually had huge strategic implications on both build orders and compositions.
The Increasing Skill Line
With all of that in mind, now it is time to consider the increasing skill level over time. For my money there were 3 large jumps in skill in SC2. The first was near the end of 2011 right before jjakji's GSL victory where a new upper class of SC2 players had come into the fold (MMA, aLive, Oz, DRG, Leenock, jjakji, PartinG, Squirtle, NaNiwa). The next was mid 2012 where the younger talent of WoL had started to fulfil potential and the first few KeSPA players had transferred over (Life, TaeJa, Creator, Symbol, HyuN, RorO, Rain, Stephano). The last bump of skill happened past the halfway mark in 2013 around the time of the PL Finals where the last of the KeSPA transfers had gotten nearly 1.5 years of practice and were now coming into their own (sOs, Soulkey, INnoVation, herO, Dear, Trap, Classic, Zest, soO). After that, only a handful of new players would trickle to the top, but there would never be large leaps of new players entering the top class all at once as the previous time periods.
Many of the strategic and tactical revolutions coincided with each wave of new champions and their understanding of the game became widespread and become rote in the meta. And it is from this understanding of SC2's timeline that we can start to understand and contextualize the achievements of the various players therein.
On May 17 2016 20:47 Cricketer12 wrote: Speaking of MC. To this day I'm pretty sure his forcefields on Xel'naga Caverns is the greatest moment in SC2 history.
Disagree with the protoss part. I think for the development of protoss as a race and figuring out how to properly play macro games, even during a time when protoss was horribly underpowered, (former) LiquidHerO stands out the most. He's still, imo, the most influential protoss in history. Here's why:
Figuring out the 1/1/1 with various counters using each tech option - robo, SG and twilight council.
Figuring out phoenix openings in WoL PvP (HerO was one of the first to ever use them, and certainly made them popular in the Korean metagame. They never stopped existing.) AND PvT (HerO was the first to mix phoenix openings in against gas-first Terran - something that stuck around until LotV).
Revolutionizing small scale game management in scenarios that derive from standard gameplay. A ton of things HerO did are still around. Example: Dark Shrine against an economically weakened Terran, using small squads of units with certain abilities to their largest possible effect.
Figuring out warp prism play in macro games all by himself (this is probably the most important one, warp prisms have been a core unit in EVERY protoss matchup since). HerO essentially invented protoss backstabbing the same way Life did for zerg.
Figuring out how to beat the Stephano roach max. HerO remodelled one of MC's existing builds (4 gates, robo, third base) and adapted it to the metagame of roach midgame timings (1gate, robo, 3gates, third).
Figuring out how to adjust stargate to the same metagame and popularizing them during WoL. Largely refined SG into colossus play, better than anyone else in WoL. The same build essentially existed until HotS, when +2/blink builds took over.
Speaking of which, HerO did +2/blink macro back in WoL. He was one of the first to do so and helped popularize it. +2/blink was used by MC before, but almost exclusively as an all in.
Figuring out how to play against slow armies of any kind (Bl/infestor as well as mech armies) - that includes figuring out completely new playstyles that enforce mobility, harassment, completely re-modelling the way protoss economy management functions (using mineral heavy units to harass, a gas heavy, safe army to threaten frontal attacks, all the while expanding faster than any other protoss to turn pressure into faster tech and stronger armies). This point is gigantic, because it shows a completely new mentality. HerO revolutionized economy management, army positioning and especially army movement and coordinated multi-pronged attacks AND non-committal aggression. This is the main pillar that protoss macro play is built on to this very day and it started with HerO.
Figuring out and perfecting blink macro vs Terran better than any other protoss, eventually leading to the widow mine patch. HerO began doing blink into templar play months before everyone started doing it.
Figuring out templar styles vs zerg, including the use of storm drops.
Figuring out one of the strongest PvT playstyles in HotS that only became weaker after the widow mine patch: Phoenix into Templar. Stuck around until BlizzCon 2014, where Classic used it to eliminate Polt, shortly after HerO himself beat Polt with it.
Figuring out multiple macro playstyles vs Terran: most notably perhaps early versions of double forge + charge/archon after pressure. Double forge was then refined by others.
First to use colossus drop macro builds, an idea that always sort of stuck around and eventually became a legitimate thing in HotS.
First to figure out the HotS PvT playstyle of mass immortal centered templar styles. Probably the strongest pre-mine-patch playstyle in PvT.
And last but not least, when KeSPA players switched over, they all named HerO as the player they studied to learn protoss in SC2. Concepts that were improved upon, macro gameplay, etc. they all learned from him. So the groundwork for all they know about the game was already in place and they learned it from HerO.
PartinG's PvT revolution and perfection of immortal/sentry execution doesn't hold up imo.
On May 17 2016 20:47 Cricketer12 wrote: Speaking of MC. To this day I'm pretty sure his forcefields on Xel'naga Caverns is the greatest moment in SC2 history.
which match would that be?
And nice article as always stuchiu! Rewatching those Parting vs jjakji games now, man that game 1 stings. Jjakji really had it.
Stephano's units compositions and engagements were great, but maybe it was not the most important part.
Stephano taught us not to take gas too early and how to defend your early third base with the bare minimum of units. He was also the first zerg player to stream, who hotkeyed his eggs and it literally blew my mind alongside 20k other viewers. The way I played zerg completely changed afterwards. So he really added to the fundamentals of the zerg skills I think.
Even Koreans started studying Stephano after IPL 3, what a god. When Jaedong switched to sc2 he looked to Stephano to learn.
Life always had the sick plays, but it was too crazy to copy.
Wonder if there will be an argument in 30 years from now like there is in football where some say Pele > Messi/Ronaldo etc due to what they had to deal with back then etc xd
Nice article though, 1000 words makes it a much more easier read
In my opinion KiWiKaKi also had a considerably big impact on the Protoss race. He was the first player who discovered the Mothership and its potential at WoL times
On May 17 2016 20:47 Cricketer12 wrote: Speaking of MC. To this day I'm pretty sure his forcefields on Xel'naga Caverns is the greatest moment in SC2 history.
On May 17 2016 21:16 Olli wrote: Disagree with the protoss part. I think for the development of protoss as a race and figuring out how to properly play macro games, even during a time when protoss was horribly underpowered, (former) LiquidHerO stands out the most. He's still, imo, the most influential protoss in history. Here's why:
Figuring out the 1/1/1 with various counters using each tech option - robo, SG and twilight council.
Figuring out phoenix openings in WoL PvP (HerO was one of the first to ever use them, and certainly made them popular in the Korean metagame. They never stopped existing.) AND PvT (HerO was the first to mix phoenix openings in against gas-first Terran - something that stuck around until LotV).
Revolutionizing small scale game management in scenarios that derive from standard gameplay. A ton of things HerO did are still around. Example: Dark Shrine against an economically weakened Terran, using small squads of units with certain abilities to their largest possible effect.
Figuring out warp prism play in macro games all by himself (this is probably the most important one, warp prisms have been a core unit in EVERY protoss matchup since). HerO essentially invented protoss backstabbing the same way Life did for zerg.
Figuring out how to beat the Stephano roach max. HerO remodelled one of MC's existing builds (4 gates, robo, third base) and adapted it to the metagame of roach midgame timings (1gate, robo, 3gates, third).
Figuring out how to adjust stargate to the same metagame and popularizing them during WoL. Largely refined SG into colossus play, better than anyone else in WoL. The same build essentially existed until HotS, when +2/blink builds took over.
Speaking of which, HerO did +2/blink macro back in WoL. He was one of the first to do so and helped popularize it. +2/blink was used by MC before, but almost exclusively as an all in.
Figuring out how to play against slow armies of any kind (Bl/infestor as well as mech armies) - that includes figuring out completely new playstyles that enforce mobility, harassment, completely re-modelling the way protoss economy management functions (using mineral heavy units to harass, a gas heavy, safe army to threaten frontal attacks, all the while expanding faster than any other protoss to turn pressure into faster tech and stronger armies).
Figuring out and perfecting blink macro vs Terran better than any other protoss, eventually leading to the widow mine patch. HerO began doing blink into templar play months before everyone started doing it.
Figuring out templar styles vs zerg, including the use of storm drops.
Figuring out one of the strongest PvT playstyles in HotS that only became weaker after the widow mine patch: Phoenix into Templar. Stuck around until BlizzCon 2014, where Classic used it to eliminate Polt, shortly after HerO himself beat Polt with it.
Figuring out multiple macro playstyles vs Terran: most notably perhaps early versions of double forge + charge/archon after pressure.
First to use colossus drop macro builds, an idea that always sort of stuck around and eventually became a legitimate thing in HotS.
First to figure out the HotS PvT playstyle of mass immortal centered templar styles. Probably the strongest pre-mine-patch playstyle in PvT.
And last but not least, when KeSPA players switched over, they all named HerO as the player they studied to learn protoss in SC2. Concepts that were improved upon, macro gameplay, etc. they all learned from him. So the groundwork for all they know about the game was already in place and they learned it from HerO.
PartinG's PvT revolution and perfection of immortal/sentry execution doesn't hold up imo.
You are way overstating HerO's contribution for a lot of builds (you fanboy you! ).
He certainly helped with the 111, but other Protoss like Parting, Squirtle or even MC had a lot of key innovations down. MC was the first to show a fully safe 1 gate expand build that could hold any timings for example; before that people were bitching about 1gate FE being too greedy and not scouting with an obs in time, vs 2gate robo FE which did scout it in time but had a mediocre economy and a worse army by the time 111 hit.
The same goes for the roach max; stargate 4gate robo was ok if not fantastic against it no matter the specific variation used, and all the robo expand builds developed by Creator and Rain just to name two (who are the true inventors of the 3base +2 blink builds) outright crushed it.
The HotS Robo/Templar builds were mostly updates on the WoL Startale build, and imo Zest and Parting were much more notable for them than HerO. Stargate/Templar is also debatable. I absolutely agree on the Blink/Templar builds though. In general, WoL Startale players were the ones to refine PvT builds the most, along with Creator's double forge.
If i remember correctly the only Kespa Protoss pro who specifically named HerO as an inspiration was Bisu.
That's why.. lol. I got completely stumped because if maru's name were to make an appearance in that article, it would certainly have been in the last paragraph where we go over the up and coming Koreans who are participated in that "bump of skill".
On May 17 2016 21:16 Olli wrote: Disagree with the protoss part. I think for the development of protoss as a race and figuring out how to properly play macro games, even during a time when protoss was horribly underpowered, (former) LiquidHerO stands out the most. He's still, imo, the most influential protoss in history. Here's why:
Figuring out the 1/1/1 with various counters using each tech option - robo, SG and twilight council.
Figuring out phoenix openings in WoL PvP (HerO was one of the first to ever use them, and certainly made them popular in the Korean metagame. They never stopped existing.) AND PvT (HerO was the first to mix phoenix openings in against gas-first Terran - something that stuck around until LotV).
Revolutionizing small scale game management in scenarios that derive from standard gameplay. A ton of things HerO did are still around. Example: Dark Shrine against an economically weakened Terran, using small squads of units with certain abilities to their largest possible effect.
Figuring out warp prism play in macro games all by himself (this is probably the most important one, warp prisms have been a core unit in EVERY protoss matchup since). HerO essentially invented protoss backstabbing the same way Life did for zerg.
Figuring out how to beat the Stephano roach max. HerO remodelled one of MC's existing builds (4 gates, robo, third base) and adapted it to the metagame of roach midgame timings (1gate, robo, 3gates, third).
Figuring out how to adjust stargate to the same metagame and popularizing them during WoL. Largely refined SG into colossus play, better than anyone else in WoL. The same build essentially existed until HotS, when +2/blink builds took over.
Speaking of which, HerO did +2/blink macro back in WoL. He was one of the first to do so and helped popularize it. +2/blink was used by MC before, but almost exclusively as an all in.
Figuring out how to play against slow armies of any kind (Bl/infestor as well as mech armies) - that includes figuring out completely new playstyles that enforce mobility, harassment, completely re-modelling the way protoss economy management functions (using mineral heavy units to harass, a gas heavy, safe army to threaten frontal attacks, all the while expanding faster than any other protoss to turn pressure into faster tech and stronger armies).
Figuring out and perfecting blink macro vs Terran better than any other protoss, eventually leading to the widow mine patch. HerO began doing blink into templar play months before everyone started doing it.
Figuring out templar styles vs zerg, including the use of storm drops.
Figuring out one of the strongest PvT playstyles in HotS that only became weaker after the widow mine patch: Phoenix into Templar. Stuck around until BlizzCon 2014, where Classic used it to eliminate Polt, shortly after HerO himself beat Polt with it.
Figuring out multiple macro playstyles vs Terran: most notably perhaps early versions of double forge + charge/archon after pressure.
First to use colossus drop macro builds, an idea that always sort of stuck around and eventually became a legitimate thing in HotS.
First to figure out the HotS PvT playstyle of mass immortal centered templar styles. Probably the strongest pre-mine-patch playstyle in PvT.
And last but not least, when KeSPA players switched over, they all named HerO as the player they studied to learn protoss in SC2. Concepts that were improved upon, macro gameplay, etc. they all learned from him. So the groundwork for all they know about the game was already in place and they learned it from HerO.
PartinG's PvT revolution and perfection of immortal/sentry execution doesn't hold up imo.
You are way overstating HerO's contribution for a lot of builds (you fanboy you! ).
He certainly helped with the 111, but other Protoss like Parting, Squirtle or even MC had a lot of key ingredients down. MC was the first to show a fully safe 1 gate expand build that could hold any timings for example.
The same goes for the roach max; stargate 4gate robo was ok if not fantastic against it no matter the specific variation used, and all the robo expand builds developed by Creator and Rain just to name two (who are the true inventors of the 3base +2 blink builds) outright crushed it.
The HotS Robo/Templar builds were mostly updates on the WoL Startale build, and imo Zest and Parting were much more notable for them than HerO. Stargate/Templar is also debatable. I absolutely agree on the Blink/Templar builds though. In general, WoL Startale players were the ones to refine PvT builds the most, along with Creator's double forge.
If i remember correctly the only Kespa Protoss pro who specifically named HerO as an inspiration was Bisu.
1) For the 1/1/1, PartinG, Squirtle weren't even relevant then. HerO figured it out in 2011 when everyone was losing to it. I'll concede MC's gateway expand, but HerO started doing nexus first builds vs T regularly - something that was extremely effective against a 1/1/1 and had nothing to do with MC's 1gate expand.
2) SG/4gate/robo really wasn't ideal vs roach max builds. The updated version was much, much better imo. Roach max regularly killed SG/4gate, but the robo first version almost never got beaten. Rain/Creator refined 3base timings in PvZ, but they didn't invent them. People (including HerO, but most notably Genius/Parting) did them way before as pre-hive all ins. As for 3base +2/blink in HotS, I think the specific build originated in the SKT house with Rain, PartinG and Classic. But the foundations of it already existed in WoL, as early as 2011 (HerO already used it as a macro tech option then).
3) Phoenix/Templar was a HerO build through and through, HerO used it exclusively (to beat Maru as early as a few months after HotS release in 2013).
4) Rain named HerO in a GSL interview. Best, Stork named him in an interview at MLG, sOs named him at some tournament but I forgot.
I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
While no one ever perfectly emulated Life's style of SC2, his tactical plays became part of the basic fundamentals of Zerg play that every player would include to some extent in their repertoire.
Surprised there is no mention of DRG. While Life refined zerg aggression, DRG literraly invented counterattacks. Before DRG terrans would never wall of their naturals nor have any bunker while attacking the zerg player.
Zerg before DRG was all about defending and defending, but DRG reinvented how you could play zerg in early 2011, and terran needed to adjust their playstyle as a consequence.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
I also don't see anything special about Polt vs MMA. Looking for ways to be aggressive and take favorable trades was always what Marine/Tanks was about. Polt just did it pretty well in that game.
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it.
I still wager that Marineking didn't think about splitting Marines before he saw MVP do it.
While no one ever perfectly emulated Life's style of SC2, his tactical plays became part of the basic fundamentals of Zerg play that every player would include to some extent in their repertoire.
Surprised there is no mention of DRG. While Life refined zerg aggression, DRG literraly invented counterattacks. Before DRG terrans would never wall of there naturals nor have any bunker before attacking the zerg player.
Zerg before DRG was all about defending and defending, but DRG reinvented how you could play zerg in early 2011, and terran needed to adjust their playstyle as a consequence.
DRG was a ZvT monster back then
I'm surprised to see no mention of Parting's immortal all-in since it was a lot more important than those PvT openings IMO
I would rate Trickster pretty high in Protoss strategy building. Iirc, he was the one who first to utilize force field in early engagement before MC and He brought the mass AOE (HT, Colossus & Archon) deathball in PVT and PVZ. And DRG, the one who save Zerg from the speed ling opening.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
While I agree terran play was defined in early years (I would add to MMA to MvP mkp and Polt though), it still had some important changes afterward
For instance there were two "revolutions" in TvP in HotS, changing the meta drastically in the match up :
FIrst one was made by the CJ entus terrans during Hot6ix cup : it was the constant mine drop strategy. When everybody was just doing one mine drop as an opening, sKyHigH and BByong showed that you could keep on dropping forever until the eventual win, even if first drops were defended there would always be one moment when the big mine hit would happen and give you a game wining advantage.
Chronologically, sKyHigh vs Classic on KSS was the first game to show this. (twitch vod is no longer available, though)
Then, the second revolution was made by Maru when he decided he didn't need vikings to deal with the colossi. The infamous game against Myungsik still bring tears in protosses eyes.
With LotV, these two revolutions are now totally obsolete, but they are still worth mentioning imo.
Edit : found sKyHigh vs Classic on youtube : here game starts at 19min 50.
You can see it's a revolution just by hearing how puzzled and clueless the casters are about a build that would be the standard 1 month later. Even MoonGlade doesn't understand shit until it's obvious.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
On May 18 2016 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote: I still think people overvalue revolutions way too much, or rather defining one player as the source of it. Said this multiple times before, but this article talks about it so i will just post it again:
At the end of the day we have no idea who came up with a new strategy/tactic/whatever. In the times of ladder literally anybody on there could be the one who actually started doing these builds/ using new concepts first. All we see is someone using it in livegames, probably refining it allong the way to fit his style and have success with it. Or maybe it was a coach who thought this new style/concept would work perfectly with the skillset of player x who then gets called "revolutionist". Valuing this is way too vague at best and completely wrong at worst.
Concerning skill level: it is pretty trivial that the skill level itself goes up over time, pointing out huge jumps is a good place to start though! I kinda miss the idea of general level of competition though. Not only does the skill level rise, with the kespa switch the whole scene got more professional and the general competition got a lot more fierce. Right now there are a lot of players who can potentially win code s every single season, even though we obviously have an s class group who are favored. You could say it went down a bit though after the mass retiring of kespa players in general, that would be fair enough i guess.
It's something we've actually been discussing; the skill level in Korea is lower than ever before. Compare it to late WoL / HotS and it's not even close really
I saw stuchiu's tweet and couldn't come up with a good reasoning?! I think that statement is wrong. Can you elaborate why you guys think that way?
They're playing a new game. We're still in the Fruitdealer/Nestea period of LotV basically. The very top is really far ahead (especially Zest basically plays PvT with the refinement of someone who has played LotV for 2 years) but the lower tier Koreans are closer to the foreigners than they ever were in HotS.
Or something like that.
LOTV is still sc2. I don't think the game changed nearly enough to make that claim tbh. Who are these low lvl koreans? violet, hydra and polt? That's a fairly small sample size to state that i think.
I think ever since mid-HotS, mid-tier Koreans have been slowly fading away, and it's happening even more in LotV.
Put it this way—choose a top 8 of KR atm and it goes something like Zest, Maru, TY, Stats, Dark, Dear, Cure, herO (in no order). Compare that to the top 8 of 2013/14/15 and I don't think there's too much difference. We're yet to see Maru in Starleagues, but Zest has just clocked up as good a 6 months of any player in years IMO, along with Maru 2015 / Life 2015 / Classic 2015 / Zest 2014.
However, try and pick a top 16, and 9-16 are far weaker than at any equivalent time in recent memory.
I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote: I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
There was Kyrix_Zenex waaaaaaaay before ST_Life became a thing. His time was admittedly short (I do not think he was into the game that much) but he was one Z who knew how to be aggressive.
On May 18 2016 04:36 usethis2 wrote: There was Kyrix_Zenex waaaaaaaay before ST_Life became a thing. His time was admittedly short (I do not think he was into the game that much) but he was one Z who knew how to be aggressive.
He just did a dum 2 base baneling all in that had no long time impact on the meta. The only reason it worked was because terran didn't open reactor hellion.
On May 17 2016 21:16 Olli wrote: Disagree with the protoss part. I think for the development of protoss as a race and figuring out how to properly play macro games, even during a time when protoss was horribly underpowered, (former) LiquidHerO stands out the most. He's still, imo, the most influential protoss in history. Here's why:
Figuring out the 1/1/1 with various counters using each tech option - robo, SG and twilight council.
Figuring out phoenix openings in WoL PvP (HerO was one of the first to ever use them, and certainly made them popular in the Korean metagame. They never stopped existing.) AND PvT (HerO was the first to mix phoenix openings in against gas-first Terran - something that stuck around until LotV).
Revolutionizing small scale game management in scenarios that derive from standard gameplay. A ton of things HerO did are still around. Example: Dark Shrine against an economically weakened Terran, using small squads of units with certain abilities to their largest possible effect.
Figuring out warp prism play in macro games all by himself (this is probably the most important one, warp prisms have been a core unit in EVERY protoss matchup since). HerO essentially invented protoss backstabbing the same way Life did for zerg.
Figuring out how to beat the Stephano roach max. HerO remodelled one of MC's existing builds (4 gates, robo, third base) and adapted it to the metagame of roach midgame timings (1gate, robo, 3gates, third).
Figuring out how to adjust stargate to the same metagame and popularizing them during WoL. Largely refined SG into colossus play, better than anyone else in WoL. The same build essentially existed until HotS, when +2/blink builds took over.
Speaking of which, HerO did +2/blink macro back in WoL. He was one of the first to do so and helped popularize it. +2/blink was used by MC before, but almost exclusively as an all in.
Figuring out how to play against slow armies of any kind (Bl/infestor as well as mech armies) - that includes figuring out completely new playstyles that enforce mobility, harassment, completely re-modelling the way protoss economy management functions (using mineral heavy units to harass, a gas heavy, safe army to threaten frontal attacks, all the while expanding faster than any other protoss to turn pressure into faster tech and stronger armies). This point is gigantic, because it shows a completely new mentality. HerO revolutionized economy management, army positioning and especially army movement and coordinated multi-pronged attacks AND non-committal aggression. This is the main pillar that protoss macro play is built on to this very day and it started with HerO.
Figuring out and perfecting blink macro vs Terran better than any other protoss, eventually leading to the widow mine patch. HerO began doing blink into templar play months before everyone started doing it.
Figuring out templar styles vs zerg, including the use of storm drops.
Figuring out one of the strongest PvT playstyles in HotS that only became weaker after the widow mine patch: Phoenix into Templar. Stuck around until BlizzCon 2014, where Classic used it to eliminate Polt, shortly after HerO himself beat Polt with it.
Figuring out multiple macro playstyles vs Terran: most notably perhaps early versions of double forge + charge/archon after pressure. Double forge was then refined by others.
First to use colossus drop macro builds, an idea that always sort of stuck around and eventually became a legitimate thing in HotS.
First to figure out the HotS PvT playstyle of mass immortal centered templar styles. Probably the strongest pre-mine-patch playstyle in PvT.
And last but not least, when KeSPA players switched over, they all named HerO as the player they studied to learn protoss in SC2. Concepts that were improved upon, macro gameplay, etc. they all learned from him. So the groundwork for all they know about the game was already in place and they learned it from HerO.
PartinG's PvT revolution and perfection of immortal/sentry execution doesn't hold up imo.
I am a true and true HerO fanboy, but this in not a fanboy post, its reality. Warp prism was built into the game by Blizzard, but its role was decided by HerO himself
Stephano taught us not to take gas too early and how to defend your early third base with the bare minimum of units.
As great as Stephano was, Spanishiwa was at the forefront of this movement.
I dunno, maybe if you say so, but Stephano made it work vs the best players in the world. I know that Spanishiwa demonstrated how good queens are, but I don't think he took the third as early as Stephano.
Still he was definitely an innovator and fun to watch!
Fruitdealer contributed way more than nestea in the larvae management and drone/units production.
It was because of the fruit vendor that all zergs learned to cycle between drone production and unit production. The one player that defied that rule was Life, and that is why he will be the best zerg of sc2.
And on the Terran side, MKP invented terran micro, literally. That's half of the terran game, come on. Jinro deserves some credit when it comes to terran macro: more than Mvp, imo.
Despite Mvp being the GOAT of sc2, his contributions to terran mechanics are sparse. He was the king of one-off builds and strategy tweaks. But defining terran macro, idk, Jinro for me is the one we should credit for establishing the basis of terran macro, especially in his two semifinals runs at GSL.
Jinro deserves some credit when it comes to terran macro: more than Mvp, imo.
No not even close. Watch MVP play in 2010 and compare that to Jinro. MVP's playstyle is by far the most modern you'll find of any player in 2010. On the other hand Jinro does some weird ass stuff and often relies on cheesy stuff to get ahead.
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote: I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
This sounds really interesting, but how in the world can you balance strategies? That doesn't seem to make sense? We have the units, we devise the strategies, no?
FruitDealer seems underappreciated for his contributions to the very early days of Zerg. Saw Zerg as the reactive race it later became known as and doing it in a meta where zerg struggled due to small maps and GomTvT.
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote: I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
This sounds really interesting, but how in the world can you balance strategies? That doesn't seem to make sense? We have the units, we devise the strategies, no?
Difficult things are difficult, but certainly not impossible. You have to understand, predict and plan for the interaction between units and how different matchups will be affected. And then make changes when players use them in different ways. It goes way beyond basic interaction between individual units.
It isn't really that difficult in game design honestly, especially if someone like me can do it. But Blizzard's focus has always been on individual units and counters, and the examples are literally endless since it is all Blizzard does (or doesn't do since they've shown a complete inability to balance strategies)... perhaps my favorite was the knee-jerk Thor nerf after Thorzain used Strike Cannons to wreck Immortals in TSL3. Looking only at the individual units certainly made it feel imbalanced, but Protoss had a lot of other choices... but no worries, Blizzard made sure that Immortals would counter Thors as they had intended.
In the end, you can only change units, but a unit should be thought of as a part of strategies, and not as an individual unit, since we only use units in a strategic context, no?
Blizzard can't see the forest due to the trees. Their thinking starts at stops at the unit level. And that is why they've never been able to balance strategies.
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote: I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
this is very wrong in light of modern PvZ
Why?
PvZ, at it's height of game certainly had more strategic diversity than today. This was before maps allowed Zerg to turtle to Broodlord/Infestor, but after the Void/Colossus/Stalker deathball era.
And if you think about the great interactions we have in modern PvZ, it is between units that don't hard counter each other. That is actually true across matchups, the interaction between hard counters is boring. And is especially true with tier 1 units, where the presence of hard counters must be limited due to limited choices in the early game (and this is why the Adept needed to be nerfed).
No one wants to watch Immortals versus Thors because skill and positioning are almost not important at all, Immortals just win
bomber was doing the scv pull against protoss before MVP.
also, hands down....it was ForGG who invented the reactor hellion cloak banshee opener tvz and used it as the standard
MVP was by far the most influential...but my underlying point still supports your case that there was more than one largely influential figure for Terran in WoL
On May 18 2016 15:39 LtCalley wrote: bomber was doing the scv pull against protoss before MVP.
also, hands down....it was ForGG who invented the reactor hellion cloak banshee opener tvz and used it as the standard
MVP was by far the most influential...but my underlying point still supports your case that there was more than one largely influential figure for Terran in WoL
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
On May 18 2016 18:43 AxiomBlurr wrote: The biggest game changers in my opinion, who came out with styles that were just unthinkable...were Life and sOs...
The thing is for the most part they did things that were mostly unreplecable. Granted some builds and playstyles like life's ling queen 3 base opening vs protoss etc were pretty damn noteworthy and copied. Generally I refer to those two as outliers. Very few people can do what they do.
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
Pretty sure Catz did it first.
Catz's infestors were more harass oriented.
CatZ's infestors do everything dawg
Well the way you utilized infestors was different from the way Destiny used them.
i feel like this thread is correct in its main idea! but woefully inadequate in the facts/evidence. the "evolution of the game" is much more complex than MVP, MC, and Nestea, and 2 base ht. it would really require many pages to show what developments happened where, and who helped develop them...
On May 19 2016 00:19 The_Red_Viper wrote: People arguing who invented builds in a game with matchmaking and ladder It makes little sense -.-
This is true. But I really think Destiny deserves some mention here because he was the first big name we saw really use Mass Infestors in every matchup. I think I remember show matches versus much better Koreans where he rode them to victory.
Pretty sure Catz did it first.
Catz's infestors were more harass oriented.
CatZ's infestors do everything dawg
Well the way you utilized infestors was different from the way Destiny used them.
Everyone uses units differently, and Destiny in terms of infestors, was the one to utilize them and make a build order he could follow every ZvT with early ling upgrades and infestor follow-up for defense leading into the late-game.
I've always been less of a formula oriented player. Destiny and I were always talking with each other / teammates for a good portion of the era you speak of. I think Destiny had his own moves. Much of how he used infestors, he got from me. He however, especially in ZvT, developed a more consistent style from which the ZvT meta as a whole shifted. He did something similar with less success in ZvP, where he used neural parasite on colossi off of ling surrounds. Destiny innovated a lot and had his own style of play, which made him more recognizable for his usage of certain units in this case, the infestor - within his style, he's always was somewhat one-dimensional. I on the other hand, tend to do a lot of everything instead of the same thing over and over; so despite 'having been there' or using compositions and strategies consistently before players who are eventually known for them start using them - I hardly get credited for said 'revolutions' or 'meta shifts' instead I get credited with strategies that get copied and used in the GSL or Proleague as 1-offs. Such is life. At any rate, you're both probably right in your own ways. But I'd say it's safe to say I was using infestors consistently at a high level before Steven or most other people.
Also on that note, the first time I saw infestors used, it was DIMAGA neural parasiting hellions off of 1 base (they were broken in wol beta) XD
On May 18 2016 02:06 BronzeKnee wrote: I find this article interesting because I've been slowly writing a piece focused on the history of the Mutalisk in SC2 and how each race countered it, displaying how the game has become increasingly easier to play and watered down strategically.
The difficulty in playing SC2 now compared to before is that the game is faster. Economies develop quicker, bases mine out faster, and units move literally faster, as compared to WOL. The game at its height, while it was slower, was strategically far richer, in part because it was slower, but also due the lack of hard counters. Unfortunately, WOL reached an impasse strategically due certain unit and abilities being too strong (Fungal, Vortex, ect.) and Blizzard had no idea what to do.
To put it into the context of this article, there is a lot less to "figure out" or develop strategically now because of hard counters. And this is because Blizzard's balancing focus has been, and probably always will be, on individual units and not strategies. It is why they could never balance even basic strategies like the 4 Gate, the 1-1-1, Stephanos Roach Max, or the Soul Train as the the units themselves in those individual all-ins weren't "unbalanced" and Blizzard literally spun their wheels. Blizzard's solution to a problem was always to introduce a new unit that was a hard counter. And that is why we have things like Photon Overcharge.
I should finish my piece.
This sounds really interesting, but how in the world can you balance strategies? That doesn't seem to make sense? We have the units, we devise the strategies, no?
You have to understand, predict and plan for the interaction between units and how different matchups will be affected. And then make changes when players use them in different ways. It goes way beyond basic interaction between individual units.
But Blizzard's focus has always been on individual units and counters,
This does sound interesting because it's similar to what people have been saying about Brood War - that it's more about strategy and positioning, and less about APM and building the right units. I can't pretend to understand but I'd love to see how it works out for real.
In the end, you can only change units, but a unit should be thought of as a part of strategies, and not as an individual unit, since we only use units in a strategic context, no?
Hope you weren't being snarky here cos, not cool man :/