The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Starcraft 2: Chat Channels! Come hang out in channel PA!
Although SC2 trumps BW in many areas, there is one very important area that I feel BW wins hands down, is racial play style. In BW, the races each felt they had a unique play style to them. As a Terran player, I felt Terran focused heavily on timing pushes, build order counters, and map control/knowledge. Not as sure about Zerg and Protoss, but I'm guessing Zerg focused on macro, and map control and Protoss focused on strategy and gamesense. But in SC2, it feels every race has equal amounts of focus for each component, which is a good thing in some respect, but also fails to distinguish the races.
I'm guessing (and hoping), this is only because SC2 is new, and people havn't really had time to find each race's play style.
Also, in BW, every race looked so unque in battle, Terran slowly taking over the map with tanks, Zerg's swarms of units out numbering the other army, and small spartan like Protoss armies, but in SC2, every army just feels... alike.
As a guy who played about 200 games as random (but no bw ill admit)....what?
I cant see your logic in this the races play completely different
Zombie Monkey on
League of Legends - Enzo III
0
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
id be interested to see if anyone who looks down on sc2 can actually come up with a solid reason with respect to its strategic aspects that makes it worse than bw.
all of the strategic elements in bw are still in sc2, with some new ones thrown in. if anything, sc2 is strategically more complex.
that being said, just because it's more complex, doesn't mean it's better.
personally, i think bw is a better game. but that doesn't mean sc2 is like checkers. if anything, sc2 is like super chess - the only problem is, it isn't as balanced or refined as original chess.
Keep in mind BW got various balance patches for several years before finally getting to a point where Blizz considered it "balanced."
SC2 is a 5 month old game. The balance is pretty damn good. I advise anyone who thinks SC2 is really imbalanced to go find old videos of DoW2 right after release.
I like the people who say that Sc2 is shit because it is easier to play than BW.
Like, as if BW being really hard to control and manage somehow makes it awesome. No, it doesn't.
BW is awesome because it is the game it is. I don't care if anyone could control it. I don#t care if a fucking baby could play BW by shouting "GUGUG!! GAGAGAGA!!" at the screen to make units run around.
As long as I can see entertaining matches and play entertaining matches myself, then it is a great and awesome game.
I mean, seriously, it's as if fans of 100m running would tell Usain Bolt "Oh hey you are pretty fast and all, but how about hacking off your legs and running in the Paralympics? Those are for REAL runners!"
I like the people who say that Sc2 is shit because it is easier to play than BW.
Like, as if BW being really hard to control and manage somehow makes it awesome. No, it doesn't.
BW is awesome because it is the game it is. I don't care if anyone could control it. I don#t care if a fucking baby could play BW by shouting "GUGUG!! GAGAGAGA!!" at the screen to make units run around.
As long as I can see entertaining matches and play entertaining matches myself, then it is a great and awesome game.
I mean, seriously, it's as if fans of 100m running would tell Usain Bolt "Oh hey you are pretty fast and all, but how about hacking off your legs and running in the Paralympics? Those are for REAL runners!"
Just stupid, is all.
That's a retarded analogy. Mechanics are part of SC, watching pros pull off things most of can't even imagine is part of the fun.
Your argument is pretty much the same as those of relic-rts fans, who say SC2 needs to much APM (even though that's a bunch of bs).
But don't let reason get in the way of your frothing BW hate. lol, really must have hit a button with the checkers thing.
id be interested to see if anyone who looks down on sc2 can actually come up with a solid reason with respect to its strategic aspects that makes it worse than bw.
all of the strategic elements in bw are still in sc2, with some new ones thrown in. if anything, sc2 is strategically more complex.
that being said, just because it's more complex, doesn't mean it's better.
personally, i think bw is a better game. but that doesn't mean sc2 is like checkers. if anything, sc2 is like super chess - the only problem is, it isn't as balanced or refined as original chess.
Keep in mind BW got various balance patches for several years before finally getting to a point where Blizz considered it "balanced."
SC2 is a 5 month old game. The balance is pretty damn good. I advise anyone who thinks SC2 is really imbalanced to look at any Relic RTS ever.
Fixed that for you.
As far as balance goes, there are still two expansions worth of units to go. Starcraft 2 multiplayer isn't finished yet, map balance is an ongoing problem that limits strategy (and will be fixed by the community), and the meta-game is still so young.
There's no reason Starcraft 2 can't rival or surpass Brood War in terms of strategic depth.
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
You are joking, right?
You could MAYBE have a point if you added "The Rembrandt was made over a timespan of 12 years while the Fanart was drawn in 5 months". And even that doesn't work.
BW and SC2 are the same game, made by the same people, only for different reasons. Well, not entirely different, both were made to make money, obviously, but SC2 is of course being milked for more since it is A) the sequel to one of the most successful games ever and now belongs to Activision.
@Streltsy: I don't hate BW, I hate people who act like it is the god blessened game. It's not. It's a game like every other, with faults like every other has.
And I have not said that I want a game to need huge mechanical skills or not, i said I do not care as long as I am entertained. I'm not going to dismiss a game just because I can say "Oh hey, well MAYBE I can do that to!".
I don't understand people who only think something is amazing if only a small elite part of humanity can actually pull it off.
you know im hearing gsl is doing quite bad in korea at the moment, or at least well under expectation, and from a viewer point of view it doesnt bother me because i only watch it on the off chance, but it is heartening that the NA/EU scene is so big.
Although SC2 trumps BW in many areas, there is one very important area that I feel BW wins hands down, is racial play style. In BW, the races each felt they had a unique play style to them. As a Terran player, I felt Terran focused heavily on timing pushes, build order counters, and map control/knowledge. Not as sure about Zerg and Protoss, but I'm guessing Zerg focused on macro, and map control and Protoss focused on strategy and gamesense. But in SC2, it feels every race has equal amounts of focus for each component, which is a good thing in some respect, but also fails to distinguish the races.
I'm guessing (and hoping), this is only because SC2 is new, and people havn't really had time to find each race's play style.
Also, in BW, every race looked so unque in battle, Terran slowly taking over the map with tanks, Zerg's swarms of units out numbering the other army, and small spartan like Protoss armies, but in SC2, every army just feels... alike.
As a guy who played about 200 games as random (but no bw ill admit)....what?
I cant see your logic in this the races play completely different
I tried to type out what I meant, but it just turned into long paragraphs of blah blah blah. I can't explain it, it's just a feeling. I'll have to write you a poem or a song one day about it from my heart.
Although SC2 trumps BW in many areas, there is one very important area that I feel BW wins hands down, is racial play style. In BW, the races each felt they had a unique play style to them. As a Terran player, I felt Terran focused heavily on timing pushes, build order counters, and map control/knowledge. Not as sure about Zerg and Protoss, but I'm guessing Zerg focused on macro, and map control and Protoss focused on strategy and gamesense. But in SC2, it feels every race has equal amounts of focus for each component, which is a good thing in some respect, but also fails to distinguish the races.
I'm guessing (and hoping), this is only because SC2 is new, and people havn't really had time to find each race's play style.
Also, in BW, every race looked so unque in battle, Terran slowly taking over the map with tanks, Zerg's swarms of units out numbering the other army, and small spartan like Protoss armies, but in SC2, every army just feels... alike.
As a guy who played about 200 games as random (but no bw ill admit)....what?
I cant see your logic in this the races play completely different
I tried to type out what I meant, but it just turned into long paragraphs of blah blah blah. I can't explain it, it's just a feeling. I'll have to write you a poem or a song one day about it from my heart.
Make it a sonnet and you can have my number
While I find SC2 a lot more fun to play because it cuts out a lot of tedious bullshit, I agree with him that the matchups were more unique in Brood War. In SC2, most of the game revolves around taking your giant ball of units and figuring out how to best smash it against the other guy's giant ball. Certain match ups in BW were like that (particularly ones involving Protoss), but others, such as TvP and ZvT, were so wildly different in terms of army control and map control that it was rarely as simple as amassing a big amorphous blob of random units and attack-moving.
Drag on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
Although SC2 trumps BW in many areas, there is one very important area that I feel BW wins hands down, is racial play style. In BW, the races each felt they had a unique play style to them. As a Terran player, I felt Terran focused heavily on timing pushes, build order counters, and map control/knowledge. Not as sure about Zerg and Protoss, but I'm guessing Zerg focused on macro, and map control and Protoss focused on strategy and gamesense. But in SC2, it feels every race has equal amounts of focus for each component, which is a good thing in some respect, but also fails to distinguish the races.
I'm guessing (and hoping), this is only because SC2 is new, and people havn't really had time to find each race's play style.
Also, in BW, every race looked so unque in battle, Terran slowly taking over the map with tanks, Zerg's swarms of units out numbering the other army, and small spartan like Protoss armies, but in SC2, every army just feels... alike.
As a guy who played about 200 games as random (but no bw ill admit)....what?
I cant see your logic in this the races play completely different
I tried to type out what I meant, but it just turned into long paragraphs of blah blah blah. I can't explain it, it's just a feeling. I'll have to write you a poem or a song one day about it from my heart.
Make it a sonnet and you can have my number
While I find SC2 a lot more fun to play because it cuts out a lot of tedious bullshit, I agree with him that the matchups were more unique in Brood War. In SC2, most of the game revolves around taking your giant ball of units and figuring out how to best smash it against the other guy's giant ball. Certain match ups in BW were like that (particularly ones involving Protoss), but others, such as TvP and ZvT, were so wildly different in terms of army control and map control that it was rarely as simple as amassing a big amorphous blob of random units and attack-moving.
While again i didnt play bw, cant alot of this be changed by better maps, larger maps? I am personally very interested to see what heppens when someone introduces significanlty larger maps into the pool, how it effects the meta game and what attributes of each race it exposes that are currently a little frustrated by the map pool we have now.
you know im hearing gsl is doing quite bad in korea at the moment, or at least well under expectation, and from a viewer point of view it doesnt bother me because i only watch it on the off chance, but it is heartening that the NA/EU scene is so big.
All the "GSL failing" talk is based on 2 events, the opening ceremony for GSL season 4 having 500 spectators in a 5000 person venue, and Boxer's latest matches having only 50 spectators in the studio. Nothing about online viewership or overall trends.
People are taking these two events as signs of the death knells of SC2 in Korea.
you know im hearing gsl is doing quite bad in korea at the moment, or at least well under expectation, and from a viewer point of view it doesnt bother me because i only watch it on the off chance, but it is heartening that the NA/EU scene is so big.
All the "GSL failing" talk is based on 2 events, the opening ceremony for GSL season 4 having 500 spectators in a 5000 person venue, and Boxer's latest matches having only 50 spectators in the studio. Nothing about online viewership or overall trends.
People are taking these two events as signs of the death knells of SC2 in Korea.
I didnt say failing i said performing under expectations, and my point wasnt so much about that so much as my joy that the EU/NA scene is doing so well, which i think is a really good thing.
I have to agree with s_86 here, at least I think I know what he means.
In sc2 it's basically always a "deathball" vs. "Deathball" going at eachother in fights with small micro stuff during it but it didn't look like that in BW. It was more like s_86 said, terran didn't go anywhere without sieged tanks except early rush and vultures. Zerg was truly a "swarm" in bw compared to sc2 where you could see beautiful Hydraballs :P Toss on the other hand could rip stuff apart with few units that was a hard counter
In sc2 all the races are played very differently yes, but the actual fights etc. is much more similar on all races compared to bw Sometimes it feels like what differs sc2 from bw is builds, buildorders in general. If you know the buildorders and counters on all races then you have an easier time as random in sc2 then in bw.
Just my 2cents though ^^
Raz on
I'm not procrastinating, I said i'll deal with it later!
SC2 EU: Raz.982
you know im hearing gsl is doing quite bad in korea at the moment, or at least well under expectation, and from a viewer point of view it doesnt bother me because i only watch it on the off chance, but it is heartening that the NA/EU scene is so big.
All the "GSL failing" talk is based on 2 events, the opening ceremony for GSL season 4 having 500 spectators in a 5000 person venue, and Boxer's latest matches having only 50 spectators in the studio. Nothing about online viewership or overall trends.
People are taking these two events as signs of the death knells of SC2 in Korea.
I didnt say failing i said performing under expectations, and my point wasnt so much about that so much as my joy that the EU/NA scene is doing so well, which i think is a really good thing.
Sorry, wasn't trying to attribute the quote to you or anyone in this forum. I agree that it's cool how much it's catching on elsewhere
Protoss and Terran definitely have the deathball vs deathball problem, but Zerg still feel delightfully swarmy to me. Creep-spread is also a great mechanic as far as making Zerg unique goes (IMO). I think once Terran has a way to go mech more easily (either through meta-game shifts, balance changes, or new units), you'll see the Protoss and Terran play diverge a bit.
While again i didnt play bw, cant alot of this be changed by better maps, larger maps? I am personally very interested to see what heppens when someone introduces significanlty larger maps into the pool, how it effects the meta game and what attributes of each race it exposes that are currently a little frustrated by the map pool we have now.
It's possible!
I feel like late-game multi-base PvT potentially turns into one of the most exciting and fun match-ups to play, with colossi, hts, ghosts, and thors all seeing action and small groups of units moving all over the place harassing shit. Unfortunately, 99% of pvts seem to end with the first push (by either side) within 15 minutes. I think that larger maps with a lot more fields to expand to could alleviate the problem for that particular match-up to some extent, but who knows.
Drag on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
How come no one told me iNcontroL was casting the Reddit thing.
Sorry Gretorp but you're not as funny or mean as Geoff.
Protoss and Terran definitely have the deathball vs deathball problem, but Zerg still feel delightfully swarmy to me. Creep-spread is also a great mechanic as far as making Zerg unique goes (IMO). I think once Terran has a way to go mech more easily (either through meta-game shifts, balance changes, or new units), you'll see the Protoss and Terran play diverge a bit.
Is dball v dball necessarily bad? In BW, it was stationary fortress of tanks vs mobile mass zealot/goon with vultures thrown in to harrass.
I kind of like that terran still has mech, which may need to be buffed or something, but also has infantry thats much more mobile now that medics and dropships are one unit. medivacs are so underused and underexplored i think
While again i didnt play bw, cant alot of this be changed by better maps, larger maps? I am personally very interested to see what heppens when someone introduces significanlty larger maps into the pool, how it effects the meta game and what attributes of each race it exposes that are currently a little frustrated by the map pool we have now.
It's possible!
I feel like late-game multi-base PvT potentially turns into one of the most exciting and fun match-ups to play, with colossi, hts, ghosts, and thors all seeing action and small groups of units moving all over the place harassing shit. Unfortunately, 99% of pvts seem to end with the first push (by either side) within 15 minutes. I think that larger maps with a lot more fields to expand to could alleviate the problem for that particular match-up to some extent, but who knows.
Lategame PvT is by far my favourite to play because of how good small tactical squads can be, how little harasses can win you games. Also I love the ghost v HT battle, feedback and ff's are the reason i love protoss.
Protoss and Terran definitely have the deathball vs deathball problem, but Zerg still feel delightfully swarmy to me. Creep-spread is also a great mechanic as far as making Zerg unique goes (IMO). I think once Terran has a way to go mech more easily (either through meta-game shifts, balance changes, or new units), you'll see the Protoss and Terran play diverge a bit.
Is dball v dball necessarily bad? In BW, it was stationary fortress of tanks vs mobile mass zealot/goon with vultures thrown in to harrass.
I kind of like that terran still has mech, which may need to be buffed or something, but also has infantry thats much more mobile now that medics and dropships are one unit. medivacs are so underused and underexplored i think
I wouldn't say it's necessarily bad, but it does make at least unit movement a bit too similar between Terran and Protoss. This is reduced in the late-game once Templars are out. It also has a problem of readability, since a deathball will generally have some sort of air unit (or semi-air like Colossi) that makes it a bit difficult to see what's going on.
If you watched the code A matches, Gilja vs Sangho is a good example. Because of all the medivacs and and Colossi, Tasteosis couldn't really tell who was winning until the fight was almost totally over. That's a bit of a problem in my opinion, but it might bother other people less.
I miss BW TvP; the blue goo, the zealots smashing into a tank line 2-3 screens wide, the arbitersssssss.
I don't think it'll be that slow style mech push in SC2, but it might get better with bigger maps and if the skill cap keeps getting raised with better players.
Streltsy on
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I have to agree with s_86 here, at least I think I know what he means.
In sc2 it's basically always a "deathball" vs. "Deathball" going at eachother in fights with small micro stuff during it but it didn't look like that in BW. It was more like s_86 said, terran didn't go anywhere without sieged tanks except early rush and vultures. Zerg was truly a "swarm" in bw compared to sc2 where you could see beautiful Hydraballs :P Toss on the other hand could rip stuff apart with few units that was a hard counter
In sc2 all the races are played very differently yes, but the actual fights etc. is much more similar on all races compared to bw Sometimes it feels like what differs sc2 from bw is builds, buildorders in general. If you know the buildorders and counters on all races then you have an easier time as random in sc2 then in bw.
Just my 2cents though ^^
I don't disagree but I really and truly think this is just a matter of time
but I mean... I watched tvz in bw last night that was a ball of marines aginst a ball of lings and lurkers... and there was marine spreading to take out the lurkers like we have against banelings, and that was the battle.
and random is easier -also- because it's a new game. people don't know all the intricacies yet, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
FrankoSometimes I really wish I had four feet so I could dance with myself to the drumbeatRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
umm what is inControl casting? LINK PLZ!
Franko on
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
you can't hate on people who love BW because of the insane technical requirements to be the best. those people aren't going to love sc2 in the same way, at least not for a while.
I think it's a shame, I never even thought about it when sc2 was coming out but it does make sense and it's valid. not everyone has to be a fan for the same reason.
personally I'd rather the match be about strategy and scouting and micro than the particular multitasking requirements of BW (lacking auto mining and mbs) but just because someone thinks those absolutely make the game doesn't make them wrong, it's what they're impressed by. edit - this isn't to say BW isn't about all those things too. I guess what I mean is I'd rather the person who is the best strategist win over the person with the fastest fingers... and it's not like sc2 doesn't reward speed. it's just less of a requirement.
Posts
As a guy who played about 200 games as random (but no bw ill admit)....what?
I cant see your logic in this the races play completely different
Keep in mind BW got various balance patches for several years before finally getting to a point where Blizz considered it "balanced."
SC2 is a 5 month old game. The balance is pretty damn good. I advise anyone who thinks SC2 is really imbalanced to go find old videos of DoW2 right after release.
I think it's more like the difference between appreciating a Rembrandt and Starcraft Fan Art.
That's a retarded analogy. Mechanics are part of SC, watching pros pull off things most of can't even imagine is part of the fun.
Your argument is pretty much the same as those of relic-rts fans, who say SC2 needs to much APM (even though that's a bunch of bs).
But don't let reason get in the way of your frothing BW hate. lol, really must have hit a button with the checkers thing.
INCONTROL CASTING REDDIT INVITATIONAL WITH DIGGITY
Fixed that for you.
As far as balance goes, there are still two expansions worth of units to go. Starcraft 2 multiplayer isn't finished yet, map balance is an ongoing problem that limits strategy (and will be fixed by the community), and the meta-game is still so young.
There's no reason Starcraft 2 can't rival or surpass Brood War in terms of strategic depth.
You could MAYBE have a point if you added "The Rembrandt was made over a timespan of 12 years while the Fanart was drawn in 5 months". And even that doesn't work.
BW and SC2 are the same game, made by the same people, only for different reasons. Well, not entirely different, both were made to make money, obviously, but SC2 is of course being milked for more since it is A) the sequel to one of the most successful games ever and
@Streltsy: I don't hate BW, I hate people who act like it is the god blessened game. It's not. It's a game like every other, with faults like every other has.
And I have not said that I want a game to need huge mechanical skills or not, i said I do not care as long as I am entertained. I'm not going to dismiss a game just because I can say "Oh hey, well MAYBE I can do that to!".
I don't understand people who only think something is amazing if only a small elite part of humanity can actually pull it off.
We should all play Warcraft.
So there.
I'm watching WhiteRa on the reddit one, but Adel Scott was playing in the TSL qualifiers as well.
Make it a sonnet and you can have my number
While I find SC2 a lot more fun to play because it cuts out a lot of tedious bullshit, I agree with him that the matchups were more unique in Brood War. In SC2, most of the game revolves around taking your giant ball of units and figuring out how to best smash it against the other guy's giant ball. Certain match ups in BW were like that (particularly ones involving Protoss), but others, such as TvP and ZvT, were so wildly different in terms of army control and map control that it was rarely as simple as amassing a big amorphous blob of random units and attack-moving.
While again i didnt play bw, cant alot of this be changed by better maps, larger maps? I am personally very interested to see what heppens when someone introduces significanlty larger maps into the pool, how it effects the meta game and what attributes of each race it exposes that are currently a little frustrated by the map pool we have now.
All the "GSL failing" talk is based on 2 events, the opening ceremony for GSL season 4 having 500 spectators in a 5000 person venue, and Boxer's latest matches having only 50 spectators in the studio. Nothing about online viewership or overall trends.
People are taking these two events as signs of the death knells of SC2 in Korea.
PSN: Robo_Wizard1
I didnt say failing i said performing under expectations, and my point wasnt so much about that so much as my joy that the EU/NA scene is doing so well, which i think is a really good thing.
In sc2 it's basically always a "deathball" vs. "Deathball" going at eachother in fights with small micro stuff during it but it didn't look like that in BW. It was more like s_86 said, terran didn't go anywhere without sieged tanks except early rush and vultures. Zerg was truly a "swarm" in bw compared to sc2 where you could see beautiful Hydraballs :P Toss on the other hand could rip stuff apart with few units that was a hard counter
In sc2 all the races are played very differently yes, but the actual fights etc. is much more similar on all races compared to bw
Just my 2cents though ^^
SC2 EU: Raz.982
Sorry, wasn't trying to attribute the quote to you or anyone in this forum. I agree that it's cool how much it's catching on elsewhere
PSN: Robo_Wizard1
Viewing planned for this weekend, feels like an mlg weekend now
how did i not hear about this
It's possible!
I feel like late-game multi-base PvT potentially turns into one of the most exciting and fun match-ups to play, with colossi, hts, ghosts, and thors all seeing action and small groups of units moving all over the place harassing shit. Unfortunately, 99% of pvts seem to end with the first push (by either side) within 15 minutes. I think that larger maps with a lot more fields to expand to could alleviate the problem for that particular match-up to some extent, but who knows.
Sorry Gretorp but you're not as funny or mean as Geoff.
Is dball v dball necessarily bad? In BW, it was stationary fortress of tanks vs mobile mass zealot/goon with vultures thrown in to harrass.
I kind of like that terran still has mech, which may need to be buffed or something, but also has infantry thats much more mobile now that medics and dropships are one unit. medivacs are so underused and underexplored i think
i said that in my fuck the police post!
Lategame PvT is by far my favourite to play because of how good small tactical squads can be, how little harasses can win you games. Also I love the ghost v HT battle, feedback and ff's are the reason i love protoss.
I wouldn't say it's necessarily bad, but it does make at least unit movement a bit too similar between Terran and Protoss. This is reduced in the late-game once Templars are out. It also has a problem of readability, since a deathball will generally have some sort of air unit (or semi-air like Colossi) that makes it a bit difficult to see what's going on.
If you watched the code A matches, Gilja vs Sangho is a good example. Because of all the medivacs and and Colossi, Tasteosis couldn't really tell who was winning until the fight was almost totally over. That's a bit of a problem in my opinion, but it might bother other people less.
I don't think it'll be that slow style mech push in SC2, but it might get better with bigger maps and if the skill cap keeps getting raised with better players.
I don't disagree but I really and truly think this is just a matter of time
but I mean... I watched tvz in bw last night that was a ball of marines aginst a ball of lings and lurkers... and there was marine spreading to take out the lurkers like we have against banelings, and that was the battle.
and random is easier -also- because it's a new game. people don't know all the intricacies yet, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
I think it's a shame, I never even thought about it when sc2 was coming out but it does make sense and it's valid. not everyone has to be a fan for the same reason.
personally I'd rather the match be about strategy and scouting and micro than the particular multitasking requirements of BW (lacking auto mining and mbs) but just because someone thinks those absolutely make the game doesn't make them wrong, it's what they're impressed by. edit - this isn't to say BW isn't about all those things too. I guess what I mean is I'd rather the person who is the best strategist win over the person with the fastest fingers... and it's not like sc2 doesn't reward speed. it's just less of a requirement.
edit - incontrol http://www.teamliquid.net/video/streams/FearGorm