23 replies to this topic

[volcaniclostone]

I was reading what Alex wrote and it made me wonder whether he was right or not. So I decided to reinstall UAW and download patch 1 and two, so I would be able to watch the replays that have been posted.

After watching a lot of replays I soon discovered that Alex was right. Present players are way better then the past players. Sure there were players with great micro but they all lacked the technical skill of the game. For instance in the game between IGN Samodelkin #1 (N) vs. Kinth #2 (H) (1161 downloads) Kinth being the No2 couldn’t counter dervish jets. To me that’s bit sad, and I mean what was with all those Assem. walkers with ark turrets, that is not how you counter air at all. I would have at least 20 lost ones and the rest Defs. I mean 2 pop cap for def LOL. that would be one of the strongest combo around and for fun I would have a Mags.

Then I saw a lot of GenVon replays and let me say well IGN Samodelkin and Doggiedoodle way better than GenVon. For instance he had a game 1vs3. I stopped watching it half way, the players were too passive except for TsNodYR  he did good. I very much doubt Gen would last longer than 8 mins between my H Pur's N and Alex's M.

All though there are lot LESS players on then there used to be. The quality of our games is much HIGHER and we all know our game styles which makes it makes it so much harder to counter. Therefore I believe present players are better.

[Kelathin]

volcaniclostone, on Sep 14 2009, 05:46 PM, said:

I was reading what Alex wrote and it made me wonder whether he was right or not. So I decided to reinstall UAW and download patch 1 and two, so I would be able to watch the replays that have been posted.

After watching a lot of replays I soon discovered that Alex was right. Present players are way better then the past players. Sure there were players with great micro but they all lacked the technical skill of the game. For instance in the game between IGN Samodelkin #1 (N) vs. Kinth #2 (H) (1161 downloads) Kinth being the No2 couldn’t counter dervish jets. To me that’s bit sad, and I mean what was with all those Assem. walkers with ark turrets, that is not how you counter air at all. I would have at least 20 lost ones and the rest Defs. I mean 2 pop cap for def LOL. that would be one of the strongest combo around and for fun I would have a Mags.

Then I saw a lot of GenVon replays and let me say well IGN Samodelkin and Doggiedoodle way better than GenVon. For instance he had a game 1vs3. I stopped watching it half way, the players were too passive except for TsNodYR  he did good. I very much doubt Gen would last longer than 8 mins between my H Pur's N and Alex's M.

All though there are lot LESS players on then there used to be. The quality of our games is much HIGHER and we all know our game styles which makes it makes it so much harder to counter. Therefore I believe present players are better.

I think, you're missing a really important point though. You should read the patch notes and consider which patches were in effect and what got nerfed and what got buffed.  Kinth couldn't counter the Dervish jets because Dervish jets were OP in patch 1, lost ones and arcs BOTH got a huge bonus to AA I believe in patch 2. Dervishes got nerfed so badly they weren't using in later patches even for strategical purposes. I always found AM tanks superior for cost to damage ratio in moderately large groups in both patch 2 and 3.
As for General Von, He was on the top of DOW II, BFMEII, and a couple FPS rank ladders for quite sometime prior to him going to college. That says something about his skill as a player. Catching onto game technical skills is something that comes with playing a game constantly, that speaks little of a player's skill in the broader sense as it can't be passed game to game to game.

[volcaniclostone]

Kelathin, on Sep 15 2009, 06:26 AM, said:

I think, you're missing a really important point though. You should read the patch notes and consider which patches were in effect and what got nerfed and what got buffed.  Kinth couldn't counter the Dervish jets because Dervish jets were OP in patch 1, lost ones and arcs BOTH got a huge bonus to AA I believe in patch 2. Dervishes got nerfed so badly they weren't using in later patches even for strategical purposes. I always found AM tanks superior for cost to damage ratio in moderately large groups in both patch 2 and 3.

I had the same discussion with Pur, about dervish jets. Yes you are right they were OP but you are forgetting about lost ones, they have two abilities one is phase and the other bombs. If he can’t take down the jets then is a simple matter of taking out the aircraft assemblies directly. To slow down the unit production while unleashing defs. I’m not sure whether you had to research the jets at the aircraft assemblies but I think you had too and it buys you time. Then it was just a matter of using Mags as he did but it was too late.

Kelathin, on Sep 15 2009, 06:26 AM, said:

As for General Von, He was on the top of DOW II, BFMEII, and a couple FPS rank ladders for quite sometime prior to him going to college. That says something about his skill as a player. Catching onto game technical skills is something that comes with playing a game constantly, that speaks little of a player's skill in the broader sense as it can't be passed game to game to game.

When you say he was at the top of DOW2, surprisingly I never saw him there especially I got it a day before its release date. BTW I never said he wasn’t a skilled player, he has great micro and games such as Dow2 and the others you mentioned all heavily rely on micro not as much on technical skill.


I suppose it’s a question between technical skills vs. micro skills.
To me micro means you can play the game more efficiently but it doesn’t mean you are good at a game.
For example: Gen vs. Rouge in starcraft
Gen might better in micro but Rouge would beat him overall since he is far more technical.  
If I’ll use myself as an example where I have minimal micro and yet I’m one of the hardest players to beat.
PRACTISE MAKES PERFECT

[Kelathin]

volcaniclostone, on Sep 14 2009, 08:54 PM, said:

I had the same discussion with Pur, about dervish jets. Yes you are right they were OP but you are forgetting about lost ones, they have two abilities one is phase and the other bombs. If he can’t take down the jets then is a simple matter of taking out the aircraft assemblies directly. To slow down the unit production while unleashing defs. I’m not sure whether you had to research the jets at the aircraft assemblies but I think you had too and it buys you time. Then it was just a matter of using Mags as he did but it was too late.


When you say he was at the top of DOW2, surprisingly I never saw him there especially I got it a day before its release date. BTW I never said he wasn’t a skilled player, he has great micro and games such as Dow2 and the others you mentioned all heavily rely on micro not as much on technical skill.


I suppose it’s a question between technical skills vs. micro skills.
To me micro means you can play the game more efficiently but it doesn’t mean you are good at a game.
For example: Gen vs. Rouge in starcraft
Gen might better in micro but Rouge would beat him overall since he is far more technical.  
If I’ll use myself as an example where I have minimal micro and yet I’m one of the hardest players to beat.
PRACTISE MAKES PERFECT

Well, I never said you said that he wasn't a skilled player. I said, that GenVon's accomplishments in various tournaments, and ladder ranks, shows his skill as a player. Kinda surprised you haven't seen him in DoW II, he was in beta from day one and played it quite frequently along with Cod4

The whole technical skill verse micro management skill is an interesting debate topic. In recent years, there has been an emerging genre called Real Time Tactics which seem to be replacing standard RTS. Competitive Tactical games usually are more fun to watch, as they are very dynamic and can shift tides near instantaneously from a well placed ability.

[volcaniclostone]

Kelathin, on Sep 15 2009, 10:07 PM, said:

The whole technical skill verse micro management skill is an interesting debate topic. In recent years, there has been an emerging genre called Real Time Tactics which seem to be replacing standard RTS. Competitive Tactical games usually are more fun to watch, as they are very dynamic and can shift tides near instantaneously from a well placed ability.

I think UAW is a technical game that’s why I love it so much. I know the game isn’t balanced, and for that reason alone I enjoy it much more. To me it’s like a game of chess. Each unbalance has its own piece, and each time a player a goes for the OP there is a counter for it. I know this is going to sound funny but the game is so unbalanced it actually balances it out. With great players like Pur, Alex and even Vic it’s really hard to OP them, the only way to win against them if they make a mistake and then it’s a checkmate.

[AlexRuiz]

Interesting how it sparked discussion

I agree with Volc, while the best ones from the past had better micro than the best ones of today, in the end, they would lose more than they would win simply by the fact that the game is more than individual units micromanagement. We might not be as good microing the units, but we understand better the interactions of the units as a whole. Furthermore, we understand better what the enemy units can do, and how that relates to our current army, to plan and react accordingly.

We are also faster builders. The biggest imbalance in any game is superior firepower, and building faster means superior firepower than your enemy when you engage.

Volc is also right about balance, while the game has a few big imbalances, we are fairly good at countering them with our own imbalances. In addition, if you play with good players you eventually learn something. Pur was already a top 5 player over a year ago, so additonal practice now made him the king. We play with him, we learn something. Eventually, even he will learn something and become even better.

Yes, players from the past had better micro, we won't even discuss it. Players of today have better macro, better knowledge.


Alex

[Kelathin]

Just to go back to this topic, I wrote an article for the newsletter challenging concept of UaW being a technical game, be interested to see what you guys think of it
http://www.petroglyp...er_20091012.php

[kclymer1]

Kelathin, on Oct 15 2009, 07:02 AM, said:

Just to go back to this topic, I wrote an article for the newsletter challenging concept of UaW being a technical game, be interested to see what you guys think of it
http://www.petroglyp...er_20091012.php

Interesting.

[AlexRuiz]

Kelathin, on Oct 15 2009, 08:02 AM, said:

Just to go back to this topic, I wrote an article for the newsletter challenging concept of UaW being a technical game, be interested to see what you guys think of it
http://www.petroglyp...er_20091012.php

Good article Kel. You are absolutely right, micromanagement is need. However, we have never said it wasn't

It is a given for a decent player to do what you mentioned: shuffle architects as Masari to maximize their usefulness, race for the cows as hierarchy, build flow conduits like crazy as novus.... some of those actions are in fact almost natural after playing a while. I know I am devoting 6-8 architects in the beggining to empower matter engines alone. I am moving the rest to build / assist the structures. But shuffling the architects is only part of the operations. Build a balanced force to contain fast rushes, engage quickly to see what the opponet is planning to do, while at the same time start advancing the tech and ramp up more facilities to eventually overpower the enemy. Players from the past are better at the other part: micro this conqueror, micro these 2 grunts, micro these 3 variants.... but player from today are better at throwing a superior force to that conqueror, or those 2 grunts, or those 3 variants, not to mention a surprise tactic.

I had a custom friendly game against a player who decided to spam field inverters.... the map was altiplano. I engaged him very quickly, so I saw what his intention was.... I obviously started massing a force, but I decided to surprise him with a trick. I placed an ME right next to the bridge in the most direct path... when his 18+ FIs finally decided to attack, at the bridge they shot the ME, taking it out... but also took out themselves as the ME explosion destroyed the bridge. I didn't have superio micro, I had superior macro. By the time he rebuilt some of the FIs, they were no match to the superior firepower of my attack force, as I had also covered all the choke points.

I could have tried to micro some figments or some conquerors trying to slow him down. That would have
not worked. He would have eventually ammassed his 18+ FIs, and I would have had an inferior force. So, instead of trying to show my mad skills microing an individual unit, I just used the strengths of my faction. Yes, I had to shuffle my architects and have 2 of them place the ME fast at the choke point, but as I said, that is a given for a decent player.

Edited by AlexRuiz, 15 October 2009 - 11:24 PM.

[Purified]

AlexRuiz, on Oct 15 2009, 09:19 PM, said:

I had a custom friendly game against a player who decided to spam field inverters.... the map was altiplano. I engaged him very quickly, so I saw what his intention was.... I obviously started massing a force, but I decided to surprise him with a trick. I placed an ME right next to the bridge in the most direct path... when his 18+ FIs finally decided to attack, at the bridge they shot the ME, taking it out... but also took out themselves as the ME explosion destroyed the bridge. I didn't have superio micro, I had superior macro. By the time he rebuilt some of the FIs, they were no match to the superior firepower of my attack force, as I had also covered all the choke points.

I could have tried to micro some figments or some conquerors trying to slow him down. That would have
not worked. He would have eventually ammassed his 18+ FIs, and I would have had an inferior force. So, instead of trying to show my mad skills microing an individual unit, I just used the strengths of my faction. Yes, I had to shuffle my architects and have 2 of them place the ME fast at the choke point, but as I said, that is a given for a decent player.

Lol!, such fail tactic for your opponent
If you blew the ME up yourself before the FIs noticed it and started shooting it, then it would have been less fail and more of a trap for him. (he really could have gone around once he saw it or killed it with 1...I suppose he didn't expect bridge to collapse)

I have a secret micro idea for archs..
Keep 2 arch on a ME with a production structure somewhere nearby. You can then switch the archs to the empowering the structure. Then if you time it right, you can switch them back onto the ME before it produces another round of res. Thus you gain full ME econ and you gain a slight bonus in production speed.  
Would work very well early game, as far as throughout goes it would be too much to manage I think.

[Kelathin]

AlexRuiz, on Oct 16 2009, 12:19 AM, said:

Good article Kel. You are absolutely right, micromanagement is need. However, we have never said it wasn't

It is a given for a decent player to do what you mentioned: shuffle architects as Masari to maximize their usefulness, race for the cows as hierarchy, build flow conduits like crazy as novus.... some of those actions are in fact almost natural after playing a while. I know I am devoting 6-8 architects in the beggining to empower matter engines alone. I am moving the rest to build / assist the structures. But shuffling the architects is only part of the operations. Build a balanced force to contain fast rushes, engage quickly to see what the opponet is planning to do, while at the same time start advancing the tech and ramp up more facilities to eventually overpower the enemy. Players from the past are better at the other part: micro this conqueror, micro these 2 grunts, micro these 3 variants.... but player from today are better at throwing a superior force to that conqueror, or those 2 grunts, or those 3 variants, not to mention a surprise tactic.

I had a custom friendly game against a player who decided to spam field inverters.... the map was altiplano. I engaged him very quickly, so I saw what his intention was.... I obviously started massing a force, but I decided to surprise him with a trick. I placed an ME right next to the bridge in the most direct path... when his 18+ FIs finally decided to attack, at the bridge they shot the ME, taking it out... but also took out themselves as the ME explosion destroyed the bridge. I didn't have superio micro, I had superior macro. By the time he rebuilt some of the FIs, they were no match to the superior firepower of my attack force, as I had also covered all the choke points.

I could have tried to micro some figments or some conquerors trying to slow him down. That would have
not worked. He would have eventually ammassed his 18+ FIs, and I would have had an inferior force. So, instead of trying to show my mad skills microing an individual unit, I just used the strengths of my faction. Yes, I had to shuffle my architects and have 2 of them place the ME fast at the choke point, but as I said, that is a given for a decent player.

"It is a given for a decent player to do what you mentioned", the fact that it is given, means you are unaware dedicating resources to micro other games do not make you do. Games like say Starcraft or Age of Empire/Mythology series have a simpler resource mechanic. The fact is you don't NEED to micro, unlike UaW where a decent player MUST do it.

There is nothing skilled about spamming a single unit, neither in micro nor macro, so I don't know how you claim there is any difference. There is a reason spamming a singular OP unit is considered a bad thing, by most players.

[volcaniclostone]

Kelathin, on Oct 15 2009, 08:02 PM, said:

Just to go back to this topic, I wrote an article for the newsletter challenging concept of UaW being a technical game, be interested to see what you guys think of it
http://www.petroglyp...er_20091012.php

Interesting article, but I kind of disagree,

To me the game isn’t micro manageable as SC or Age.  I think your article is bit one sided where you are focused too much on micro.

Hierarchy-no micro need at all
1) H res collection: H don’t need to Micro reapers at all. When going for cows one Reaper is enough to make the journey there. The rest of reapers can harvest res together.
2) Kamal Rex: As long as he is abducting reapers aren’t important as much.

Masari-medium micro
1) Architects: Shuffling architects between structures and Me or constructing buildings close by is not micro but macro and relatively speaking 12 architects in the start is more than enough.

Novus
Only this faction which is very Micro intensive.

Overall it only depends on the player and how they want to over complicate the game. I don’t bother with small instants cause from experience if I’m going for a lamp sometimes it may not pick up and than I’m focused a lamp instead of attacking or abducting, therefore making my game look more micro intensive.

[Kelathin]

volcaniclostone, on Oct 18 2009, 08:50 AM, said:

Interesting article, but I kind of disagree,

To me the game isn’t micro manageable as SC or Age.  I think your article is bit one sided where you are focused too much on micro.

Hierarchy-no micro need at all
1) H res collection: H don’t need to Micro reapers at all. When going for cows one Reaper is enough to make the journey there. The rest of reapers can harvest res together.
2) Kamal Rex: As long as he is abducting reapers aren’t important as much.

Masari-medium micro
1) Architects: Shuffling architects between structures and Me or constructing buildings close by is not micro but macro and relatively speaking 12 architects in the start is more than enough.

Novus
Only this faction which is very Micro intensive.

Overall it only depends on the player and how they want to over complicate the game. I don’t bother with small instants cause from experience if I’m going for a lamp sometimes it may not pick up and than I’m focused a lamp instead of attacking or abducting, therefore making my game look more micro intensive.

The goal of the article is to focus on micro management that is embedded in the layers of gameplay, not macro.

Just off the top of my head that are solely related to UaW
Hierarchy:
1.) Reapers are the first crushing unit availible for Hierarchy, bringing a reaper into battle against masari means they can crush architects and get a nice instagrab corpse too boot. Crushing avengers is even more important. Can mean the difference between a PB for free even
2.) Kamal abupting 2 or 3 PBs verse 6 or 7 disciples is pretty huge
3.)Lost one bombs, 3-4 takes out flow gen, so managing groups of 4 can disable the entire novus power infrastructure.

Masari
1.)MvM Conq crushing archs is basically a timed event
2.) Dark Fig mines. stopping a walker cold is huge timing thing as take too long, your fig ends up crushed and unable to lay more mines.
3.) Timed release of sentry cargo. Keeping your disciple, avenger, architect in until the last second possible before ejecting them.  Even using dark mode to speed movement and the extra DMA then swapping to light when DMA is empty.

[volcaniclostone]

Kelathin, on Oct 19 2009, 08:32 PM, said:

The goal of the article is to focus on micro management that is embedded in the layers of gameplay, not macro.

Just off the top of my head that are solely related to UaW
Hierarchy:
1.) Reapers are the first crushing unit availible for Hierarchy, bringing a reaper into battle against masari means they can crush architects and get a nice instagrab corpse too boot. Crushing avengers is even more important. Can mean the difference between a PB for free even
2.) Kamal abupting 2 or 3 PBs verse 6 or 7 disciples is pretty huge
3.)Lost one bombs, 3-4 takes out flow gen, so managing groups of 4 can disable the entire novus power infrastructure.

Masari
1.)MvM Conq crushing archs is basically a timed event
2.) Dark Fig mines. stopping a walker cold is huge timing thing as take too long, your fig ends up crushed and unable to lay more mines.
3.) Timed release of sentry cargo. Keeping your disciple, avenger, architect in until the last second possible before ejecting them.  Even using dark mode to speed movement and the extra DMA then swapping to light when DMA is empty.

Every game that’s out there uses micro. To me this game is less micro manageable and more technical, as I said before it's up to the player that determents how much micro intensive the game will become.
I'm one of those players were my micro is crap at best but at the same time I’m one of the hardest players to beat and I use minimal micro, and the only reason why I'm so hard to beat it's because I understand the units and I know tricks that can win the game.

Here are just some examples how the game is simplified by using technical skill over micro.
1) Kamal using force field on a bridge or narrow pass followed by abduct
2) Using monoliths with walkers vs. figs
3) Have 16 lost ones in one group instead of 4 groups of 4, and go into a Novus base. Once the enemy sees them they will either send their force on them or my fave send mira to crush them, at that point drop a SW on the lost ones and then use phase. After that well you just place 16 bombs where you like instead of trying to dance around units using micro.
4) Use SW as a source of resources  when resourcers are dire
5) Have 6 saucer in repair mode and let orlock loose with units behind him
6) Have dark mines placed near ME and then let it explode

I can go on and on but these are just basic quick kills there is no real micro needed only common sense. Sure a player with a better micro can get units out faster or can get more out of units but he will only lose units quicker vs. a well technical player.

[AlexRuiz]

Kelathin, on Oct 19 2009, 08:32 AM, said:

1.) Reapers are the first crushing unit availible for Hierarchy, bringing a reaper into battle against masari means they can crush architects and get a nice instagrab corpse too boot. Crushing avengers is even more important. Can mean the difference between a PB for free even
2.) Kamal abupting 2 or 3 PBs verse 6 or 7 disciples is pretty huge

Please, please, please, send those reapers to my base... you'll save me the trouble to go hunting for them I never had someone send me the reapers as attack force, and I would surely love to get them. By the time the reaper arrives, I should already have 4-5 disciples , one fig and one guardian.... send me the reapers please.

While abducting 3 PBs is obviously more valuable than abducting disciples, don't undeestimate the disciples capabilites. They are not affected my Nufai's phase, and a bunch of them will render an unescorted walker into a pile of resources in no time. As Masari it would hurt me a lot if if Rex abducts 15 or so disciples (volc has done it before to me, it is hilarious )

Kelathin, on Oct 19 2009, 08:32 AM, said:

1.)MvM Conq crushing archs is basically a timed event

Again, go ahead, send it. This strat implies that a quick victory is expected and the mid game viability is risked. Keep sending them one by one, a superior force will dispatch of the lonely unit This is the perfect example of "micro vs macro" To rush the agressor compromises production, eventually, the one by one will be no match to several factories pumping out units Again, this implies that the player attacked has some idea of what to do and builds fast.

[AlexRuiz]

Kelathin, on Oct 16 2009, 08:10 AM, said:

"It is a given for a decent player to do what you mentioned", the fact that it is given, means you are unaware dedicating resources to micro other games do not make you do.

My point is that some players are better at "babysitting" units, but then again, no matter how good you are at babysitting them, if the opponent brings a superior force, that will beat the dance of the babysitter. The perfect example is the antimatter tanks vs Masari. A lot has been said of AMs being better than conquerors and a natural match, and I have always disagreed. The conqueror is a main battle tank, the AM is a light tank. You are going by those games where a good "babysitter" has only one conqueror and loses to 4 AMs, obviosly it is going to happen. Support that conqueror with 3 disciples, and see who wins...... This is a good example of better macro, a good powerful unit that will be outproduced by inferior units will lose, but the powerful unit with some support from lower tier units of its own camp will have much better chances.

Being outnumbered means the "babysitter" no matter how good he/she is, will lose. The good macro player knows that you require similar firepower, given usually by similar numbers. The good macro player also knows what to use against the units enemy is producing. Inquisitor spam? Go redirects as novus, outspam him with disciples as masari, or take advantage of the cheapest and most effective turrets in the game as hierarchy (add some lost ones to the mix)

In summary, yes, a good degree of micro is implicit to play the game effectively, and it is a must. But a good babysitter with a limited idea of counters will lose to a mediocre babysitter that has better idea of the strategy and production. Nobody can deny the talent and skills of Pur, but even he has admitted his babysitting is mediocre. However, it really doesn't matter if he forgets about those 9 ohms scattered that he used to scout when his army is shredding the opponent.

[volcaniclostone]

I got to agree with Alex. He is one of the smartest M. players around; to infiltrate his base it’s really hard to do. Figs lurking everywhere   , his Beloved queen is a pain   , building structures are well distanced from each other  , and to top it all off he's got one of the best defenses around  

Whenever we play against each other it’s a game of chess. We don’t rush each other that much, we basically try not to make mistakes. It could be because we know each other game styles or it could be because we have taken the game to a higher level.  

What I m trying to say is, if you understand the units and the value they hold u can easily devastate an army with a handful of units without much micro or you don’t need to focus as much. Prime example would be Vic who is 10-12 years old and he has such a great understanding of the game, that he makes me sweat. (Sorry Pur Vic is going to shaft you soon   ), therefore I’m agreeing with Alex.

[SwiftDa sniper]

Wow what an interesting topic. I just returned to petro forums today after a long hiatus lol, so I can't really say so much for the ''recent'' players. However back when I first registered (and posted like twice   ) I must say I was impressed by the ''older'' players' commitment to discussing strategy and tactics. Maybe they had less technical knowledge of the game than recent players do, probably because the game hadn't been out as long, but I think when it came to strategic ideas and tactics they were very original, and their commitment to the game was very good. I'd say that counts for something  

[vOdToasT]

I started playing this month so I can't say. I can say that people are pretty bad, though.

[volcaniclostone]

vOdToasT, on 15 February 2010 - 03:38 PM, said:

I started playing this month so I can't say. I can say that people are pretty bad, though.

lol, most of the players are newbies so its only normal for them to be weak, but players from patch3 like myself,gravy and arrk just to name a few are really tough and then you have the older players like pur,alex and guses who are nearly unbeatable.