|
http://www.blizzforums.com/showthread.php?t=10348
Props to Misuzu for this! Koreans pwn Swedes :p rather than write the whole thing up as is written juz see the link there.
enjoy!
btw need someone to translate!!! thor owns..n the cobra looks interesting! so does pretty much everything else!
EDIT: quick rundown of translations
New infomation about Terran has been released by Korean press. Below is the link.
Main article - http://bloggernews.media.daum.net/news/226976 Unit article - http://bloggernews.media.daum.net/news/226975 Building article - http://bloggernews.media.daum.net/news/226974
Main article
- 1st picture is exploding nuclear bomb. - 2nd picture is viking in walker mode. - 3rd picture is concept art of reaper. - Siege tank got some graphical upgrade, and it will be showed in Blizzcon. - There is no more new infomation in this article.
Unit article
1. Ghost (1st picture) - Of course, he still has a stealth ability, and be able to launch a Nuclear strike. - He got 2 new ability - Snipe, Launching xxx (Sorry, Limit of reverse-translation) - Snipe is an ability which can deals huge damage to the target except a Mechanical unit. - Launching xxx is an ability that summons 6 marines to the battlefield.
2. Battlecruiser (no picture) - Got a new upgrade called Plasma injection (Of course, Not exact) which can deals huge AoE damage to ground targets.
3. Viking (2nd and 3rd picture) - In walker mode, Viking can attack a ground target with Gatling gun. - In fighter mode, he can attack an aerial target. - Transform ability can be accessed by fighter mode upgrade.
4. Banshee (4th picture) - Bomber unit which can attack only a ground target. - Uses a missile volley which deals huge AoE damage to ground targets. - Also has a stealth ability.
5. Reaper (5th picture) - He has a mining ability. - His mine is quite bit different from vulture's. - A litter later after mining, it targets on building or unit which didn't show any movement, and explodes.
6. Thor (6th picture) - Unusually, He is built by SCV. - He has some siege weapon which can deals a huge damage to building or large object. - But his weapon cooldown is long and turn speed is very slow, so he is weak to hit-and-run strategy.
7. Cobra (7th picture) - Fast hover vehicle with two rail gun. - He can shoot while moving.
8. Siege tank - Got some new graphical upgrade.
9. Marine - Still has a range upgrade and stim-pack upgrade. - He got a 15 HP upgrade and shield upgrade. (Confusing, but Both are seperate in the article.)
10. SCV - No new infomation.
http://bloggernews.media.daum.net/news/226974
1. Command center (1st picture) - It can carry 5 SCV when it rift-off. - It can be upgrade to Planetary fortress - PF can fires to an amount of enemy.
2. Tech-center & Reactor (2nd picture, and major change ever in starcraft 2) - These are new mechanism of add-on building. - Major production building (aka barrack, factory, starport) uses them. - Tech-center provides capability of creating high tech unit (Ex. medic in barrack, tank in factory) - Reactor provides capability of creating 2 units at same time. (Ex. 2 marines in barrack, 2 Vikings in Factory) - You can not connect both add-on to same building, so you can not train 2 high tech unit at same time (Ex. 2 medic in barrack)
3. Bunker - Same as original
4. Sensor dome, Radar dome - Sensor dome is detector building - Radar dome can senses enemy in large area, even in unexplored battle field. - But Radar dome is exposed to enemy, so opponent can avoid its sense area while rushing to the base.
5. Supply depot - As you know, It can submerges into ground in order to make path.
6. Missile Turret - Same as original.
|
Nuke looks awesome O_O and CC can carry 5 scvs while floating, cool! Makes terran expanding to isles alot easier..
|
|
Yeah, wow, thor looks awesome Cant wait to see their animations and sound effects
|
wow cool
so cobra replaces vulture?
and the viking is like some weird goliath/wraith/valkyrie
i guess the bomber is closer to a wraith since it can cloak
and reapers are badass with a different mine than vultures o.O
edit: thor built by scv like it's a building LOL omg
imagine lategame terran takes his army of scvs and starts constructing a billion thors
|
u can see the planatery fortress in the nuke screenshot. and barracks gets a new looking addon.theres a building with neon lights with the words BDR. and ghosts can calldown a squad of marines? COOL!
Man the supply depot walling is gonna own!
cobras can SHOOT WHILE MOVING (the unit that everyone thought was the goliath thing). hahah i knew blizz was gonna put different attack types! :p well not really surprising lol
wow. addon is reduced to ONLY TWO TYPES! so barracks, factories and starports can land on any of the two addons lol. i bet each has different upgrades for each building.
sensor dome AND radar dome? WTH man terrans gettin to much maphack
|
Hourahhh!!! The Siege Tank got some graphical upgrade :D :D
4. Sensor dome, Radar dome - Sensor dome is detector building - Radar dome can senses enemy in large area, even in unexplored battle field. - But Radar dome is exposed to enemy, so opponent can avoid its sense area while rushing to the base.
I like, I like!
|
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
wow nice shit thor looks crazy
|
These must be all the units that dont have a constant beam laser.
|
I really don't mind all the new units but seriously why get rid of a lot of the old units?
|
Soul hunters out plus tons of interesting new Terran concepts and units. I'm loving how SC2 is turning out. The new tank graphic should be the icing on the cake.
|
Aw shit , Vikings, and Thors, and Banshees oh my.
|
Two kinds of add ons and you can choose to put them on Rax or Factories.
Reactor: Lets you build 2 units from attached building (2 marines at once from a rax, 2 vikings from a factory) Tech Center: Allows advanced units to be built (medics from rax, tanks from factory)
One addon per building, so no building 2 tanks or 2 medics from the same building simultaneously. I'm not sure if this is a good thing for the raxs, since you'll have to have an addon to every rax if you want to make medics from all of them. I guess it's not a big deal since we build less medics these days anyway, but if there is a firebat like unit in SC2 and we want to quickly produce them en masse like in SC1 it will be more difficult.
|
On July 19 2007 21:42 CharlieMurphy wrote: I really don't mind all the new units but seriously why get rid of a lot of the old units?
It's Sc2, not Bw 2.
|
I like the new add ons and that they reduced them to only two. All those different add ons in SC are so annoying...
|
On July 19 2007 21:49 Scorpion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 21:42 CharlieMurphy wrote: I really don't mind all the new units but seriously why get rid of a lot of the old units? It's Sc2, not Bw 2.
Has nothing to do with that. They got rid of half the units and the ones they kept they changed them drastically.
No wraiths for example.
|
Protoss absolutely pale in creativity compared to Terran. Thor is fucking huge, holy shit.
I thoroughly approve of Terran so far, Blizz. Bravo. Can't wait to see Zerg.
|
On July 19 2007 21:54 mahnini wrote: Protoss absolutely pale in creativity compared to Terran. Thor is fucking huge, holy shit.
I thoroughly approve of Terran so far, Blizz. Bravo. Can't wait to see Zerg.
Maybe this is why they released the Protoss units to public first. Because Zerg and Terran were designed first (behind closed doors) and pretty much kick ass. They want community help with toss.
PS - Thor is like 3 times the size of a tank thats why scv has to build it. Probably takes a long time to build as well.
|
Canada7170 Posts
I'm loving the extreme details on the terran buildings.
|
Terran are going to be so powerful ground-to-ground and air-to-ground...
I thought that they would give the powerful air-to-ground unit to Zerg since that's one of their traditional traits (Guardians) which they could expand on, while Terran have relatively weak air-to-ground but powerful air-to-air and ground-to-air (Goliaths, Turrets, Wraiths, and Valkyries).
I want a big old flying bug dropping gallons of acid on helpless little Marines
|
wow.....the koreans definitely had the inside scoop on the terran.
The terran stuff looks very cool. Although with viking and Thor being walkers, it looks like we have too many walkers.....stalker, immortal, colossus, reaver, archon , viking, seige tank , and thor.
|
had to register for this. the new terran stuff is so damn fine.
|
The name Thor all of a sudden seems very appropiate
|
I cannot simply believe you guys are happy with this, THIS IS DEFINITELY TURNING OUT INTO A CNC WESTWOOD FEST. First off I'd like to remind everyone that the Banshee is rip-off of Nod banshee and GDI Orca bomber, second the cobra is an exact replica of the cobra tank in Emperor battle for Dune, and THE STUPID RETARDED TECH CENTER AND RADAR DOME WERE IN ALL RED ALERT AND TIBERIAN SUN!!!!@!@!@@!@!@!@! All are freaking copy rip-offs. I'm not happy at all with the things, why and why would Blizzard think that making Sc2 into a CnC game will make it sucessful? Why? Why not just stick to the old concept which made broodwar such a masterpiece? I don't know whats going right now, but if things go the way they are right now then I fear Sc2 will never the true sequel to Starcraft that it was meant to be.
After I saw this, I figured Dustin Browder is an ignorant CNC guy. I have lost faith in Sc2. People like him are the reason why Westwood could never really compete with Blizzard back in 1990's. Ironically Blizzard is hiring the same people from Westwood, and whats more scarey is that, one of those guys is working to the next sucessor of one of Blizzard's most SUCESSFUL franchices ever created. The same guy that created games that could not even hope of even comparing with Diablo or starcraft, is now the lead designer of the next big game of Blizzard. New things deos not mean its going to be okay, OH PLEASE GET BILL ROPER BACK!!!!!!111
I'm not okay, and I can't help but whine I am not happy at all.
oh btw is it just me or deos the Reaper look like its a replica of the zone trooper in CNC 3? Also the reaper kind of looks like Batman lol
|
Photon cannons get a new facelift also it seems. Lol I cant believe terran getting a BAR! ahahahah.
EDIT: unindentifid terran thing at 2 oclock in the pic above
|
honestly what i found the greatest was the nuke pic. Next to the pic there's a pic of a korean girl covering her face. hahahahahahahahha
|
On July 19 2007 22:12 tochigi wrote: had to register for this. the new terran stuff is so damn fine. welcome
|
On July 19 2007 21:47 Phyre wrote: Two kinds of add ons and you can choose to put them on Rax or Factories.
Reactor: Lets you build 2 units from attached building (2 marines at once from a rax, 2 vikings from a factory) Tech Center: Allows advanced units to be built (medics from rax, tanks from factory).
Man I always thought that add-on building looked like the cloning vat from Red Alert 2. I dont remeber the exact use in that game but it was very simmilar!.. hum
Freakin nice find..
|
just as much bad news as good news when they release any information.. i'm still incredibly sceptical of their team..
Factory looks kinda bad. And the EDGES under all terran buildings (like a metal floor sticking out) looks awful...
|
On July 19 2007 22:42 FatRine wrote: just as much bad news as good news when they release any information.. i'm still incredibly sceptical of their team..
Factory looks kinda bad. And the EDGES under all terran buildings (like a metal floor sticking out) looks awful...
--_______________________--
|
Canada7170 Posts
They have to fucking lift off. What would you do if you had to engineer a flying building?
|
I completely agree with the complaints. WTF were they thinking when they hired him?
You might argue that SC was ripped off from certain existing concepts, but at least at that point they were mostly unique in many regards.
Sure Marines and Battlecruisers were in most Sci-Fi, but Ghosts/Wraiths/Vessels are rarer finds. Even the implementation was simple and nonintrusive.
But when you start calling things Vikings, Thor, and Cobras, when 50 games have tried the same aesthetic, that makes me wince to think what the standards on the team are. If you can't show any taste when designing and naming your units, how can you possibly expect them to know how to balance it?
----
I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team.
|
On July 19 2007 23:10 naventus wrote: I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team.
They've said that a big part of the process is testing units and that some of what we've seen could and will be changed and discarded and new things added. And how gamers react obviously should also be an important factor.
|
Aren't the number of Thor's limited, maybe like the Mothership?
|
Thor looks plain nasty.. and not to mention huge in-game.. oh come on, who cares if they're semi-rip-offs from TSun and CnC?!? only a handfulof people actually play those games.. to the majority of the populace these will be 'new SC2 units'..
|
Wow, very very detailed. Supply Depot and defense addon for Terran will come in handy.
|
On July 19 2007 23:11 fuglyfrog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 23:10 naventus wrote: I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team. They've said that a big part of the process is testing units and that some of what we've seen could and will be changed and discarded and new things added. And how gamers react obviously should also be an important factor.
My point is exactly this. We shouldn't be consulted right now if they had any taste. We don't know any statistics. We don't know all the units in the game. We've seen like 4 Zerg units and have no sense what the game dynamics will be.
Yet you think it's a good idea to need our input on what they should do? I think it just means they are off their game or are very misled about what their secret to success is. There are two possibilities here - they schmooze with us to maintain image but really don't listen to too much of our input, or they are horribly incompetent and misled about what a community can do. Pick your poison.
|
On July 19 2007 23:25 bagzoo wrote: oh come on, who cares if they're semi-rip-offs from TSun and CnC?!? only a handfulof people actually play those games.. to the majority of the populace these will be 'new SC2 units'..
You missed the point. No one will complain if they are ripping ideas from really great RTS games. But they seem to be taking (bad) ideas from games that were moderately good but never really achieved the same success as SC.
|
On July 19 2007 23:30 naventus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 23:11 fuglyfrog wrote:On July 19 2007 23:10 naventus wrote: I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team. They've said that a big part of the process is testing units and that some of what we've seen could and will be changed and discarded and new things added. And how gamers react obviously should also be an important factor. My point is exactly this. We shouldn't be consulted right now if they had any taste. We don't know any statistics. We don't know all the units in the game. We've seen like 4 Zerg units and have no sense what the game dynamics will be. Yet you think it's a good idea to need our input on what they should do? I think it just means they are off their game or are very misled about what their secret to success is. There are two possibilities here - they schmooze with us to maintain image but really don't listen to too much of our input, or they are horribly incompetent and misled about what a community can do. Pick your poison.
The point of my post is that the Soul Hunter got the boot because they weren't up to the standards after testing, not because people on internet forums were bitching. And if you think that feedback from gamers has no place in creating a game then... let's just say I'm glad you don't work for Blizzard.
|
On July 19 2007 22:14 Ziel wrote:Photon cannons get a new facelift also it seems. Lol I cant believe terran getting a BAR! ahahahah. EDIT: unindentifid terran thing at 2 oclock in the pic above
Did they also fix up the mineral patch graphics? They seem to look way better now...
|
It's in pre-alpha, stop bitching.
|
United States7166 Posts
im glad finally everyone can shut the hell up about 'ZOMG THOR IS ANOTHER SUPERWEAPON BLIZZYOULIAR" now..christ have some faith in Blizzard over some Swedish mag writer who sounded like a complete idiot
wow im very happy, i especially like the addon idea makes things very interesting, and producing 2 marines at a time is hot
only thing that annoys me about addons is the space they take up, I really wish the addon would be like on top of the building so it didnt take more space or something -_-
cobra sounds cool, banshee sounds cool and sounds like much more of a pain to deal with than cloaked wraiths but that's ok .. i like how scvs can go with the command center but planetary fortresss does not sound as sweet but it should be fine as you have to spend money and time to upgrade to one
|
Thor seems a bit backwards from the progression of the game. The whole game is about mobility and moving up and down ledges and being able to hit and run
the thor is just a giant slow moving building, it looks like its severely handicapped by cliffs and ravines and rivers
Not to mention you PROBABLY cant fit one into a drop ship
However this really goes with the idea of a terran push, they set up tank and turrets and what not, and then they build the thor, all while you helplessly watch and prepare for the devastation that is to come
Second note, sensor dome? They said the missile turret was unchanged, which means it should still be a detector, so wtf is the sensor dome for?
|
United States40779 Posts
On July 19 2007 23:46 fuglyfrog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 23:30 naventus wrote:On July 19 2007 23:11 fuglyfrog wrote:On July 19 2007 23:10 naventus wrote: I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team. They've said that a big part of the process is testing units and that some of what we've seen could and will be changed and discarded and new things added. And how gamers react obviously should also be an important factor. My point is exactly this. We shouldn't be consulted right now if they had any taste. We don't know any statistics. We don't know all the units in the game. We've seen like 4 Zerg units and have no sense what the game dynamics will be. Yet you think it's a good idea to need our input on what they should do? I think it just means they are off their game or are very misled about what their secret to success is. There are two possibilities here - they schmooze with us to maintain image but really don't listen to too much of our input, or they are horribly incompetent and misled about what a community can do. Pick your poison. The point of my post is that the Soul Hunter got the boot because they weren't up to the standards after testing, not because people on internet forums were bitching. And if you think that feedback from gamers has no place in creating a game then... let's just say I'm glad you don't work for Blizzard. How exactly was the Soul Hunter not up to standard? It's their unit, they create its stats and therefore its role. The only thing established about it was the concept and the design, the rest was still entirely in Blizzards hands. Blizzard created both concept and design so I don't see why they'd suddenly U-turn on them unless an important outside input said they were sub-par. The only other explanation is Blizzard designing a unit without noticing they didn't like it.
|
On July 19 2007 23:58 caution.slip wrote: Thor seems a bit backwards from the progression of the game. The whole game is about mobility and moving up and down ledges and being able to hit and run
the thor is just a giant slow moving building, it looks like its severely handicapped by cliffs and ravines and rivers
Not to mention you PROBABLY cant fit one into a drop ship
However this really goes with the idea of a terran push, they set up tank and turrets and what not, and then they build the thor, all while you helplessly watch and prepare for the devastation that is to come
Second note, sensor dome? They said the missile turret was unchanged, which means it should still be a detector, so wtf is the sensor dome for? Its probably cheaper and used for early game to defend from cloaked shit only as opposed to relying on turrets which are actually designed for AA. It is sort of redundant though.
I actually agree with a lot of what DuffyBeer said, Why do they take all these ideas and concepts from other games and get rid of the SC1:BW concepts? If it ain't broke don't fix it.
|
Germany1297 Posts
I like (or at least willing to give a try) everything I saw about Starcraft II so far, but the Idea of the "Superweaons" (Mothershop, Tor, ?) just does not fit somehow. The Thor reminds me of the Krogoth from Total Annihilation (which was kinda cool game but not even close to balanced). The Mothership is not even different from the one in CnC.
I loved intense games that went on for nearly one hour, but i guess the superweapons will kinda limit this now. I'll give it a try .. but just because I have no other choice (:
|
T_T waah let's complain more about how CnC influences in SC2 sucks. Waah waah waah.
Seriously, stfu about all of that. If you don't like the game then don't get it. Don't try to push your biased opinions on those who are genuinely interested in the game.
Wanna know what was wrong with CnC 3? It was slow and thus encouraged macrofests and attack-moving armies into each other. You know what Starcraft 2 won't be? Slow. All other aspects aside, CnC was a great RTS that innovated a lot of things for the genre. It just didn't present it properly in the gameplay. If CnC hadn't introduced these things, would you honestly still be complaining? The Mothership is not infallible, Thors can be built en masse given the right funds if need be, etc.
Waah waah theorycrafting the worst possible scenario means that the game's going to suck
|
Wow, this stuff is all pretty sweet. This game is looking better and better if you ask me.
I *like* the fact that they're taking various influences from other games/properties as well as improving on pre-existing SC1 stuff. Just because they use one fun idea from another game doesn't mean that SC2 is going to turn into that game, just like how WC3 wasn't that much like SC even though a lot of the basic ideas are the same.
|
On July 20 2007 00:06 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 23:46 fuglyfrog wrote:On July 19 2007 23:30 naventus wrote:On July 19 2007 23:11 fuglyfrog wrote:On July 19 2007 23:10 naventus wrote: I DON'T think that a good design team needs to take feedback from users until the game is released/betaed. If you are really good at math/chess (for example), you aren't going to be asking everyone in the audience - oh hey what do you think my next step should be? You have the skill, experience, and taste to do it right and know how to do it. When the SC2 team is making calls like the Soul Hunter and relies on the community to tell them to shove it, there's something wrong with the strength and vision of the team. They've said that a big part of the process is testing units and that some of what we've seen could and will be changed and discarded and new things added. And how gamers react obviously should also be an important factor. My point is exactly this. We shouldn't be consulted right now if they had any taste. We don't know any statistics. We don't know all the units in the game. We've seen like 4 Zerg units and have no sense what the game dynamics will be. Yet you think it's a good idea to need our input on what they should do? I think it just means they are off their game or are very misled about what their secret to success is. There are two possibilities here - they schmooze with us to maintain image but really don't listen to too much of our input, or they are horribly incompetent and misled about what a community can do. Pick your poison. The point of my post is that the Soul Hunter got the boot because they weren't up to the standards after testing, not because people on internet forums were bitching. And if you think that feedback from gamers has no place in creating a game then... let's just say I'm glad you don't work for Blizzard. How exactly was the Soul Hunter not up to standard? It's their unit, they create its stats and therefore its role. The only thing established about it was the concept and the design, the rest was still entirely in Blizzards hands. Blizzard created both concept and design so I don't see why they'd suddenly U-turn on them unless an important outside input said they were sub-par. The only other explanation is Blizzard designing a unit without noticing they didn't like it.
Sigh..
From Blizzard:
We have a lot of units going into StarCraft 2 right now. Many of these units you have already seen, others you havent had a chance to hear about yet. We have a few rules for our units:
1) A unit should have a cool personality. A unit must be something that is fun to play with.
2) A unit should have their own very unique role on the battlefield.
3) A unit should be fun for the enemy to try to deal with. Generally this means good strengths and interesting weaknesses.
Theres a lot more to it of course (how intuitive it is, will it balance well, etc) but thats the basics. Right now we have a lot of units on the Protoss. Not every Protoss unit you have heard about is going to make the cut. They are in training camp. [b]We put them in the game and we see how they do.[b] We compare them to some other units and see how much overlap there is between various units in the game. We compare units that are similar and then we make the call. Which unit is cooler? Which unit has a more unique role? Which unit is more fun to fight against?
Sometimes units will get cut. For example, the Soul Hunter is not going to show at Blizzcon. He appears to have failed his training period. He was kind of cool, but not cool enough. Some other units that you have seen are going through some significant changes. They have adapted and may yet survive. Thats how we do it. Being able to try units out before we decide if they are going to be in the game or not is a huge advantage for our development process and its an opportunity that not every developer gets. Well give you more specific information on the Protoss as we figure it out. Even what you see at Blizzcon will be work-in-progress. After Blizzcon things will most definitely continue to evolve.
|
does that look like a point defense building from SupCom?
|
Overrall from what I've seen, SC2 looks quite good. Why complain about using/taking ideas from other RTS games? This is SC2, not CnC, so just because they add similar units, or ideas, doesn't make it the same. There isn't anything wrong with implementing ideas from other games, if anything it can be a big help in development. Until the game is playable in a beta....there isn't much use in whining about units and ideas you've seen in OTHER games when this is a totally different game. How do any of us know how the units are going to be in a real game, and not just from what we see/read about them? It isn't CnC, it isn't even Brood War, it's SC2.
|
ROFL what's up with that bar? Is it supposed to raise morale or something?
|
Burrow Depot is genius. The other ideas... well... I cannot say they're great.
Ghost summon marines? Wtf this isn't wc3 where you go HOLY SHIT SUMMON 2 WATER ELEMENTALS... LAME!
Marine with health upgrade? Jeez get some creativity, this isn't AOE3 where you go OMG HORSE UPG, add 50% health to calvery units...
Oh and CC with scv lift off is great idea.
Wtf is banshee? Some sort of bomber? Oh well...
Cobra... lawlz change the name plz, other than that if they manuver as well as vult no complaints
But I'll see if more special abilities come up, to see all the new options before passing judgement.
|
On July 20 2007 00:31 caution.slip wrote:does that look like a point defense building from SupCom?
The same cannon can be seen in this image, behind the Thor.
I don't really get what Terran need more static defense for with the bunker, turret and siege tank in their arsenal.
|
you already passed judgement on 6 things
they were "great", "lame", "uncreative", "great" "wtf", and "lawlznamesucks"
|
Blizzard has never been original in their entire existence. It's what they do. CnC's units ideas aren't shit, it's the game play that's slow and boring. Blizzard isn't about revolutionizing gaming genres. Blizzard is about taking ideas and improving upon them to perfection. I don't care if CnC has a bomber unit. SC isn't allowed to have bombers or mechs because CnC has them too? That's beyond ridiculous.
Guess what! CnC has units like that because *gasp* the factions in those games are human! Much how Terran are! If anything Blizzard is stealing ideas from the real world.
|
battletech series has a bomber named banshee (no real relevant point here)
|
LOL, they are taking units from other games and they have the same concepts, names and graphics, it's like "we're ripping you off and we're not even shy about it".
|
Thor is HUGE!!
The Reaper concept art looks cool.
Cobra looks fine, and so is the name, don't know why a couple of you have a problem with the name.
|
Actually, while everyone here seems so FUCKING sure that its all a huge 'ripoff' of CnC or Dune or whatever, realize that starcraft is basically based off of warhammer 40k. Toss are Eldar, Zerg areTyranids, Marines are Space Marines. The Reapers are assault marines, the walkers are dreadnaughts, the soul hunters had eldar equevilants, firebats were spacemarines with upgrades, etc.
Just stop whining please. Your making my dick soft...
|
Also, building 2 units from a building, what about contructing 2 buildings and doing the very same thing... did they forgot about that "feature" in BW?
|
Of course there are going to be goddamn charecteristics between the terrans in starcraft and units in games like CnC. You know why?
CnC is about futuristic HUMANS too. The terrans are also HUMAN. So logicaly the game designers are going to use similar technologies and such because they are both recreating what the human race will be like in the future, hence things like radar.
And I still don't see how the names cobra, reaper, and thor are any cheesier than wraith, goliath, and vulture. You're just not used to it yet.
What does Blizzard have to do to show you that its doing its best to create a great sequel. They've already gotten rid of the soul hunter and old seige tank model, how can you not have faith?
|
Hmm I think that after constructing a Thor the SCV gets to be its pilot doesnt it? I mean Terran dont have robotic combat units only (unlike Protoss).
I like the addon idea. But you guys are right: a lot of those ideas are C&C like. For example the Ghosts lauching xxx. Sounds like those specialpowers in C&C3 where you summon infantry to the battlefield.
|
since thor seems to be heavy armor and heavy attack/siege like the tanksImmortals and warprays prolly are the natural counter to it. I doubt thor even can hit air, looks like a exclusive land unit-building destroyer to me
|
On July 19 2007 21:16 Ziel wrote: 5. Reaper (5th picture) - He has a mining ability. - His mine is quite bit different from vulture's. - A litter later after mining, it targets on building or unit which didn't show any movement, and explodes.
The bit about the mines is a bit confusing to me. Here's how I read it.
It's deployed like a spider mine is in SC1, but it will not trigger when enemies move past it. Instead, it will explode once a unit stops for a short moment in close proximity to the mine. Will also trigger on buildings since they are stationary at all times.
Do you think it will work like that?
|
On July 20 2007 00:38 evanthebouncy! wrote: Burrow Depot is genius.
thanks, man
|
I guess Zerg will have the most old units in SC2, lings, muta's, ultra's, hydra's and lurk's and I for one am very happy with that :D
|
The thor looks so frigging huge, even bigger than the nexus.
|
|
I must admit... all these screens of terran army does look very Total Annihilation Esque.
But maybe it will be awesome! ^_^
Have an open mind about it... I want to see a Terran gameplay video!
|
terran looks good
marines don't have shields now?
|
Whatever happened to Protoss being the only race to receive super-units?
|
Thor aren't super units - you can have more than one of them on the battlefield at a time.
|
On July 20 2007 02:29 rS]taCat wrote: Thor aren't super units - you can have more than one of them on the battlefield at a time.
My mistake. I see now why I shouldn't have classified a unit that can take out an entire base alone as a super-unit.
|
its slow and shoots slow, it can't take out a base alone its very vulnerable to small units i guess and they already said its very vulerable to hit & run attacks
|
Everything is really great so far IMHO. And don't forget that the magic that made Starcraft such a kick ass game starts when they get into the beta stage. The Zerg were called the "Nightmare Invaders" at first and Drones could infest Command Centers for crying out loud...
|
On July 20 2007 02:24 Highways wrote: terran looks good
marines don't have shields now? they're an upgrade
|
On July 20 2007 02:36 Konni wrote: its slow and shoots slow, it can't take out a base alone its very vulnerable to small units i guess and they already said its very vulerable to hit & run attacks
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=56590
Unless the statement is just an editorial exaggeration (very possible), it sounds like it can assault a base all on its own.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
all those THORS And vikings and shit
they're just giant scvs with some extra guns n shiznit
|
On July 20 2007 01:23 lololol wrote: Also, building 2 units from a building, what about contructing 2 buildings and doing the very same thing... did they forgot about that "feature" in BW?
probably 2 buildings will be much more expensive than 1 with addon
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
|
Wow...all the new air options for protoss is starting to make alot more sense now....
also...Snipe ability for ghost sounds like the next hot thing vs. Zerg!! Irradiate on ultras and lurks?? pffft!! just snipe them shitz!!! HEAD SHOT!!!
|
I think sniping will work only on little units (like concussive damage), but this way ghost will be able to kill something on their own at last.
I'm really excited at all this new terran stuff, this does really looks like a new game, with Terran enforcing their siege supremacy once and for all... wonder what the zerg will be like ?
I can't understant the whining, SC was the game it was because of its gameplay, not because of a given unit type or appearance. If Blizzard wants to take cool concepts and melt them in their magic gameplay let them do it. And stop saying "rippoff" : hundreds of games have tanks, mechs, gunship, marines... and guess what ? because it makes sense for human tech and warfare. When they try something strange as X treads for tanks, or soul hunters (haha) there come a rain of complaints.
Ho, and the sensible "if it ain't broke don't fix it" would have made starcraft "warcraft in space" If something worked in broodwar that doesn't imply and never implied that something else may not work better
|
It is fucking awesome!!!!!! I love that game!!! i love terrans now :d
|
OH YEAH GUYZ. Thor are sooooo super units, they can assault an enemy base on their own, its not like SIEGE TANKS REAVERS ?OR GUARDIANS could do that in sc:bw!!! Its not like you can destroy it easily with a few fast units as long as you keep behind it because it has NO turning speed.
Thor is basically a giant siege unit. Thats all from what I can see. Can you kill a mother ship by attacking it from behind and keeping behind it cause it can't turn? Hell no. Not to mention you can make a few of them.
|
Banshee sounds a lot like the chopper units (comanches?) from Generals, which are also only air to ground, can also cloak and have a missile AOE bombardment.
edit: nvm... overlooked the fact that this was already posted ^_^
the Terran units in general look fine to me though
|
holy shit! holy fuck! the screenshots look really cool!
|
I'm thinking that Thor might look better on wheels. And what does a huge slow fo like him need legs for? Seems counter productive, and I think one walking robot (Viking) is enough. For some reason having two of them makes me uneasy.
|
Or maybe I'm just traumatized after watching Transformers..
w/e I'll probably feel differently tomorow.
|
Just think of Thor as the equivalent of 4 tanks or something. Just a badass siege unit. It might be that in TvP for example, you will siege with mostly tanks, because of warp rays. TvZ you might use 3 Thors + rines instead of 8 tanks + rines cos Z might not be able to handle Thors as well as toss. Or you know,whatever.
|
So if Thor only turns very slowly, could you just take some stalker and blink right behind him and blink away as he is dead?
|
Yes. Or any unit would probably do as well. Since most units in SC2 seem to move fairly fast.
|
The question is whether Thor will be unique enough for it to be worth making. It's quite a risk to make big units like that so they have to be worth it.
|
scv builds unit. mega cool
|
Is it just me, or does the Ghost being able to summon 6 marines sound like WC3? I mean seriously...
|
I find this one quite interesting. Wonder if it's a replacement to academy or something?
|
On July 20 2007 05:36 zer0das wrote: Is it just me, or does the Ghost being able to summon 6 marines sound like WC3? I mean seriously... Roughly guessing, it'll be a paradrop of some kind.
|
On July 19 2007 22:14 Duffybeer wrote: I cannot simply believe you guys are happy with this, THIS IS DEFINITELY TURNING OUT INTO A CNC WESTWOOD FEST. First off I'd like to remind everyone that the Banshee is rip-off of Nod banshee and GDI Orca bomber, second the cobra is an exact replica of the cobra tank in Emperor battle for Dune, and THE STUPID RETARDED TECH CENTER AND RADAR DOME WERE IN ALL RED ALERT AND TIBERIAN SUN!!!!@!@!@@!@!@!@! All are freaking copy rip-offs. I'm not happy at all with the things, why and why would Blizzard think that making Sc2 into a CnC game will make it sucessful? Why? Why not just stick to the old concept which made broodwar such a masterpiece? I don't know whats going right now, but if things go the way they are right now then I fear Sc2 will never the true sequel to Starcraft that it was meant to be.
After I saw this, I figured Dustin Browder is an ignorant CNC guy. I have lost faith in Sc2. People like him are the reason why Westwood could never really compete with Blizzard back in 1990's. Ironically Blizzard is hiring the same people from Westwood, and whats more scarey is that, one of those guys is working to the next sucessor of one of Blizzard's most SUCESSFUL franchices ever created. The same guy that created games that could not even hope of even comparing with Diablo or starcraft, is now the lead designer of the next big game of Blizzard. New things deos not mean its going to be okay, OH PLEASE GET BILL ROPER BACK!!!!!!111
I'm not okay, and I can't help but whine I am not happy at all.
oh btw is it just me or deos the Reaper look like its a replica of the zone trooper in CNC 3? Also the reaper kind of looks like Batman lol Although my feelings about this are not as strong as his, I am worried about the "cnc-fication" of sc2. Reaper, banshee, tech center, radar dome it's slowly becoming a big list. The colossus and mothership(superweapons aside) weren't that big of a deal because you get stalkers, immortals and phase cannons. You guys might think it has no effect that dustin browder worked on cnc, but I seriously doubt it. With that said, sc2 could still become everything we'd hope for.
|
On July 20 2007 05:36 zer0das wrote: Is it just me, or does the Ghost being able to summon 6 marines sound like WC3? I mean seriously...
Sounds awesome to me, obviously the ghost will only be able to do it within a certain range. I don't see what the hell it has to do with wc3, they're being dropped... not magically summoned. Sounds like red alert/dawn of war if anything.
I love how they made ghosts more useful. Only concern for me is that the thor is a little TOO big for my taste, looks too much like a superunit imo.
|
I think they aren't ripping of enough with the Thor.
If there is one thing that beast should look like it's the Shagohod. Half mech half tank. Would be really awsome.
Edit: Put the impellers on the "arms" and pull the legs back and add tracks to them = instant bad ass.
|
On July 19 2007 21:51 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 21:49 Scorpion wrote:On July 19 2007 21:42 CharlieMurphy wrote: I really don't mind all the new units but seriously why get rid of a lot of the old units? It's Sc2, not Bw 2. Has nothing to do with that. They got rid of half the units and the ones they kept they changed them drastically. No wraiths for example.
Its a sequel, not an expansion.
I think it would be boring if it had all the same units from the original. I like a bit of variety.
|
Is it just me, or does the Ghost being able to summon 6 marines sound like WC3? I mean seriously...
what makes it interesting is that you could take 5-6 cloaked ghosts, sneak or drop (with just 1 ship) past defenses and then instantly create 30 marines and kill an expand or two in no time flat
It's like what protoss do with arbiter's recall in bw, only limited to marines. I think it's a cool idea.
|
All these addons seem to unnecessarily complicate things. That is what I'm most upset about, also the crazy detection that terran is getting.
|
I just hope they give us the option to activate the Reaper's mines at will. This way Terran user will gain some more freedom and micro requirement. :D
As for Cobras... I don't think they really fit in. They don't seem too unique; they're just nerfed Vulture at best. ;; They should either bring the old Vultures back and give them SC2 type of mines instead of the old ones, or tweak the Cobras a lot.
As for Ghosts - I say: bring the lock down back! The sniping ability seems somewhat unoriginal. ;/ Lock down, on the other hand, is the epitome of creativity. ^^
|
Love the units. Seriously, love em. I'm so looking forward to how they move and act. Cause until now, everything looked good in pictures but was way more awesome in videos.
I wonder HOW the ghost summons marines. Probably a simple pointer and dropships fly them in? And how much will it cost in terms of supply. Will it be a one time thing or connected with mana? We'll see.
Reaper mines sound like fun. Imagine a telecasting starcraft 2 match...crowd goes wild when protoss run over them...will he stop? Yes he did!! BOOOOOOOOOOM! If you have no observer until then, every spot can be dangerous and you need a lot more time cause you can't just run around with a zealot.
Finaly! AoE damage for battlecruiser. Yamato is fun but these things are huuuuge and you'd expect a bit more devastating than a "bigger" laser".
Viking. Allready gave my toughts in other threads. I think it's a great great idea and gives terrans new form of mech mobility.
I wonder how the banshee acts and how fast he might be. Until then no comment. But seeing how many zerg units we might come across, this sounds like a perfect movie like idea.
Thor just looks badass. And i like it when things look badass.
Cobra is the new vulture of course. The fast probe hunter. I hope we can micro them like vultures. If not, screw em. THX some much for changing the siege tank look. That's what we all wanted.
SCVs in CC, no problem with that, island here i come. New Addon Buildings? Sounds fun! Radar dome sounds interessting.
Im happy with all these units so far. INGAMEVIDEOS VIDEOS VIDEOS PLEASE!!!
|
On July 20 2007 01:28 Senix wrote: Hmm I think that after constructing a Thor the SCV gets to be its pilot doesnt it? I mean Terran dont have robotic combat units only (unlike Protoss).
I like the addon idea. But you guys are right: a lot of those ideas are C&C like. For example the Ghosts lauching xxx. Sounds like those specialpowers in C&C3 where you summon infantry to the battlefield.
This is a very bad idea. If I was basically a slave for 30 minutes of game, forced to do nothing but drive back and forth to gather minerals, I'd be pretty pissed off. If suddenly given control of a giant battlemech... I might want some revenge.
I think I like some of this stuff. As usual, I'll complain about the cheesy names, but really the only thing that seriously bothers me is the wraith being removed. I felt they were extremely iconic of the terrans. The cinematic from SC1 where that squad of wraiths mess up that confederate station... so awesome! Wraiths, tanks, and marines, (imho) are units that are just so iconic that I don't see how you can drastically alter, (give them shields, octopus legs), or remove, (wraith).
Edit: I also absolutely hate the reapers. Totally doesn't fit in with the terran army imho. An easy fix would be to replace those pistols with flamethrowers and make then new age flying firebats!
|
Guys, why are you complaining about the new add-ons? From what I'm guessing, they could all potentially work on all the buildings that have them. That means if you don't want to make mass infantry anymore, you can use all those add-ons for mass mechs.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I'm liking pretty much everything except this:
- Launching xxx is an ability that summons 6 marines to the battlefield.
.. Ok, why, please tell me, was it absolutely neccessary to steal this feature from CoH (and maybe CnC too, someone said it's in there but I don't remember it)?
Blaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I just don't like the idea of that at all. The rest does sound very cool I guess. The Cobra seems like a bad replacement for the vulture however, I think the old one was more unique. But the game looks absolutely FANTASTIC even with these tiny complaints.
There's some things I don't know if I like but I decided not to complain about them since the only reason I don't like them is that it worked differently in BW I guess..
Oh and I still don't like the radar dome At all.
On July 20 2007 03:02 alffla wrote: all those THORS And vikings and shit
they're just giant scvs with some extra guns n shiznit
Lol, you know, I was talking to someone the other day and I said I was hoping the Thor would be a gigantic SCV :D I guess having the SCVs build it is the next best thing haha
On July 20 2007 02:42 T-P-S wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 02:36 Konni wrote: its slow and shoots slow, it can't take out a base alone its very vulnerable to small units i guess and they already said its very vulerable to hit & run attacks http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=56590Unless the statement is just an editorial exaggeration (very possible), it sounds like it can assault a base all on its own. Karune said it will not be a unit you want to send into an enemy base on its own.
|
On July 19 2007 22:14 Duffybeer wrote: I cannot simply believe you guys are happy with this, THIS IS DEFINITELY TURNING OUT INTO A CNC WESTWOOD FEST. First off I'd like to remind everyone that the Banshee is rip-off of Nod banshee and GDI Orca bomber, second the cobra is an exact replica of the cobra tank in Emperor battle for Dune, and THE STUPID RETARDED TECH CENTER AND RADAR DOME WERE IN ALL RED ALERT AND TIBERIAN SUN!!!!@!@!@@!@!@!@! All are freaking copy rip-offs. I'm not happy at all with the things, why and why would Blizzard think that making Sc2 into a CnC game will make it sucessful? Why? Why not just stick to the old concept which made broodwar such a masterpiece? I don't know whats going right now, but if things go the way they are right now then I fear Sc2 will never the true sequel to Starcraft that it was meant to be.
After I saw this, I figured Dustin Browder is an ignorant CNC guy. I have lost faith in Sc2. People like him are the reason why Westwood could never really compete with Blizzard back in 1990's. Ironically Blizzard is hiring the same people from Westwood, and whats more scarey is that, one of those guys is working to the next sucessor of one of Blizzard's most SUCESSFUL franchices ever created. The same guy that created games that could not even hope of even comparing with Diablo or starcraft, is now the lead designer of the next big game of Blizzard. New things deos not mean its going to be okay, OH PLEASE GET BILL ROPER BACK!!!!!!111
I'm not okay, and I can't help but whine I am not happy at all.
oh btw is it just me or deos the Reaper look like its a replica of the zone trooper in CNC 3? Also the reaper kind of looks like Batman lol
I'd say the uniqueness of Starcraft is in the balance. Everything is completely well balanced and all. I don't think it matters too much if it burrows a bit from CnC because the game will be different from it. It's the gameplay that made sc. We fell in love with the units of sc because most units are useful in their own good way.
All these addons seem to unnecessarily complicate things. That is what I'm most upset about, also the crazy detection that terran is getting.
I think so too but at the same time, they are making things LESS complicated by making it more newb-friendly with more newbier interface. So it should balance it out.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
people need to stop fearing everything that even remotely resembles a unit from another game
they aren't going to be able to come up with 15 units for each race that are completely unique with "starcraft" graphics and name and whatever
there's bound to be some overlap, you can say the same thing about BW units, oh vulture is like the nod buggy, marine is like the minigunner, whatever
|
On July 20 2007 00:17 rS]taCat wrote:T_T waah let's complain more about how CnC influences in SC2 sucks. Waah waah waah. Seriously, stfu about all of that. If you don't like the game then don't get it. Don't try to push your biased opinions on those who are genuinely interested in the game. Wanna know what was wrong with CnC 3? It was slow and thus encouraged macrofests and attack-moving armies into each other. You know what Starcraft 2 won't be? Slow. All other aspects aside, CnC was a great RTS that innovated a lot of things for the genre. It just didn't present it properly in the gameplay. If CnC hadn't introduced these things, would you honestly still be complaining? The Mothership is not infallible, Thors can be built en masse given the right funds if need be, etc. Waah waah theorycrafting the worst possible scenario means that the game's going to suck And make it an another war3? Make into a game thats going be popular for a while, but shrink into nothing after a year? Is that the game you want it to become? You don't want it to become popular in Korea, the heart of progaming? Because thats the direction its heading if Blizzard actaully listens to people like you.
IF they are making it more newb friendly then thats bad, becuase if it newb friendly like war3 or CNC3 its not going to become a competitive game.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
he's saying that the units not resembling units from other games isn't what makes starcraft popular, its the balance and speed
so they could port 90% of the units from other games but as long as it plays like BW it'll be fine
|
"1. Command center (1st picture) - It can carry 5 SCV when it rift-off."
Ha! I was right.
|
Yes but the problem is, the units with CNC influences have similar functions, roles, and attack that they had in CNC, which is not so good. If SC2 wants to be a true sequel to broodwar so it must be changed.
|
On July 19 2007 21:16 Ziel wrote: 2. Tech-center & Reactor (2nd picture, and major change ever in starcraft 2) - These are new mechanism of add-on building. - Major production building (aka barrack, factory, starport) uses them. - Tech-center provides capability of creating high tech unit (Ex. medic in barrack, tank in factory) - Reactor provides capability of creating 2 units at same time. (Ex. 2 marines in barrack, 2 Vikings in Factory) - You can not connect both add-on to same building, so you can not train 2 high tech unit at same time (Ex. 2 medic in barrack)
That is freakin' crazy...
|
Braavos36362 Posts
On July 20 2007 07:25 Duffybeer wrote: Yes but the problem is, the units with CNC influences have similar functions, roles, and attack that they had in CNC, which is not so good. If SC2 wants to be a true sequel to broodwar so it must be changed. it's impossible to say this until we've actually played the game and seen how the balance works
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
no one saw my scv THOR
|
its not an idea stolen from CoH and CnC, its an idea stolen from real life
But if it comes down to memory, you could paradrop in RA1
but i'm pretty sure you could do something like that in Cannon Fodder or something
|
The Banshee is 100% like a unit made by hungarian modders to SC:BW - Huncraft. It was called the Phantom, could cloak, and fired AoE Air-to-Ground missiles exactly like the Valkyrie frigate - ofc. the difference was the target (air or ground, for the respective vessels). It was horribly overpowered though, a handful of them could raze bases and units faster than hordes zerglings, as if they weren't there.
|
Btw, didn't you all know CCs can carry SCVs? Of course it wasn't confirmed yet, but remember the first video when the CC landed? SCVs came right out of it in an instant
|
On July 19 2007 22:14 Duffybeer wrote: I cannot simply believe you guys are happy with this, THIS IS DEFINITELY TURNING OUT INTO A CNC WESTWOOD FEST. First off I'd like to remind everyone that the Banshee is rip-off of Nod banshee and GDI Orca bomber, second the cobra is an exact replica of the cobra tank in Emperor battle for Dune, and THE STUPID RETARDED TECH CENTER AND RADAR DOME WERE IN ALL RED ALERT AND TIBERIAN SUN!!!!@!@!@@!@!@!@! All are freaking copy rip-offs. I'm not happy at all with the things, why and why would Blizzard think that making Sc2 into a CnC game will make it sucessful? Why? Why not just stick to the old concept which made broodwar such a masterpiece? I don't know whats going right now, but if things go the way they are right now then I fear Sc2 will never the true sequel to Starcraft that it was meant to be.
After I saw this, I figured Dustin Browder is an ignorant CNC guy. I have lost faith in Sc2. People like him are the reason why Westwood could never really compete with Blizzard back in 1990's. Ironically Blizzard is hiring the same people from Westwood, and whats more scarey is that, one of those guys is working to the next sucessor of one of Blizzard's most SUCESSFUL franchices ever created. The same guy that created games that could not even hope of even comparing with Diablo or starcraft, is now the lead designer of the next big game of Blizzard. New things deos not mean its going to be okay, OH PLEASE GET BILL ROPER BACK!!!!!!111
I'm not okay, and I can't help but whine I am not happy at all.
oh btw is it just me or deos the Reaper look like its a replica of the zone trooper in CNC 3? Also the reaper kind of looks like Batman lol
We gotta run out of models after a while. I agreed that Terran is pretty much full of C&C stuff. It could be a lot better for sure, but this is nowhere near the level of disappointment when I first saw the toss units though. They just need to change the models a bit. Westwood was doing fine, its EA that killed them.
|
wow...you all must be awesome artists/designers....props!!! blizzard should really invest in this massive talent pool we have here at tl.net.
|
On July 20 2007 01:37 Tiku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 21:16 Ziel wrote: 5. Reaper (5th picture) - He has a mining ability. - His mine is quite bit different from vulture's. - A litter later after mining, it targets on building or unit which didn't show any movement, and explodes. The bit about the mines is a bit confusing to me. Here's how I read it. It's deployed like a spider mine is in SC1, but it will not trigger when enemies move past it. Instead, it will explode once a unit stops for a short moment in close proximity to the mine. Will also trigger on buildings since they are stationary at all times. Do you think it will work like that?
Sounds like that's what their intent is. That... will be very different. For one, they took out spider mines blowing up buildings (and workers) in SC beta because it was way overpowered, so I wonder how they'll make it work this time. Just think... fly reapers into base, plant mines on CC, run out. Mines take out CC and any nearby workers? Surely there's something we are missing.
The part about if the moving unit vs not... sounds good vs sieged tanks (if you can get there alive), but I don't know what else is going to be sitting still for long. Something lost in the translation i bet.
|
Looking from the screenshots i can say 99% that when you activate planetary fortress, the CC can't lift-off or make new SCVs, but may still be able to store the 5 SCV load. And planetary fortress is very likely not a permanent ability, meaning you can turn it on or off depending on the situation (turn off to lift off/make SCV or turn on for extra defense). Makes it balanced IMHO. Fortress reminds you of something that is solid and grounded. So yeah.
You probably will need to create the marines first and store them up in a building somewhere before they can be called down by the Ghost ala DoW Orbital Relay style. Definitely there'll be a limit to how many marines you can store up.
Radar dome is definitely the new scanner sweep. Since CC now can become a planetary fortress, it'll be a pain to have the scanner add-on, so its a different building now. It's likely to have a large range, and only reveals units on your minimap and not on your screen/normal map. Kinda like a stationary observer but with massive range. The fact that it only reveals units in your minimap and that the dome itself is exposed to enemies, you can still send it cloaked units if the terran was dumb enough not to build sensor domes.
Missile turrets lose their detection since sensor domes now have it. Sounds fair. I think all stationary defenses in BW will lose their detection ability, making detector units more important.
Supply depots aren't effected by AOE effects such as nuke while theyre submerged. Wow.
I assume the Terran banshee is the equivalent of the colossus. But its so similar to the Zerg guardian...so maybe guardian got axed?
So we have cliff-climbing units and now units that can switch from air to ground? I can bet that ZERG WILL HAVE A MOVEABLE BURROWED UNIT! lol fo' sho'! that's the obvious direction to make zerg terrain manipulation unique.
BCs seem to be getting more and more powerful. I wonder how they're going to balance such firepower? That plus Thors...IMBA!
|
Well, this way running Zealots won't defuse them. Also consider the fact that Protoss has to get in range to strike Terran forces, so simply place your mines where Protoss would halt his units in order to attack (that's early-mid game, no observers, unless there's some good way of killing them^^).
|
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 20 2007 08:01 caution.slip wrote: its not an idea stolen from CoH and CnC, its an idea stolen from real life
But if it comes down to memory, you could paradrop in RA1
but i'm pretty sure you could do something like that in Cannon Fodder or something Lol, it's something I really don't want in BW, no matter where it comes from. Being able to call in FREE units magically from.. somewhere else, just isn't BW. It's ughsfuhgdh and the only new feature I saw in here that made me disappointed.
And as travin said when we talked about this; "so if you have a bunch of ghosts you can just have them sit at home and call in marine support again and again?"
Blah, I just don't like it at all, it doesn't make sense that you'd be able to drop them in behind enemy defences or whatever -.-
|
On July 20 2007 08:28 Blacklizard wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 01:37 Tiku wrote:On July 19 2007 21:16 Ziel wrote: 5. Reaper (5th picture) - He has a mining ability. - His mine is quite bit different from vulture's. - A litter later after mining, it targets on building or unit which didn't show any movement, and explodes. The bit about the mines is a bit confusing to me. Here's how I read it. It's deployed like a spider mine is in SC1, but it will not trigger when enemies move past it. Instead, it will explode once a unit stops for a short moment in close proximity to the mine. Will also trigger on buildings since they are stationary at all times. Do you think it will work like that? Sounds like that's what their intent is. That... will be very different. For one, they took out spider mines blowing up buildings (and workers) in SC beta because it was way overpowered, so I wonder how they'll make it work this time. Just think... fly reapers into base, plant mines on CC, run out. Mines take out CC and any nearby workers? Surely there's something we are missing. The part about if the moving unit vs not... sounds good vs sieged tanks (if you can get there alive), but I don't know what else is going to be sitting still for long. Something lost in the translation i bet.
The translation doesn't make sense at all IMO They probably meant that the mines won't move, but stay in place, not the opponents ^_^
|
Well, cool yeah.
BUT THIS IS A FUCKIN COPY OF CC3: Tiberium Wars FOR NOW.
Geez wtf, I hate that game and I don't want to get another one ffs. Is that a joke?
|
dont worry buddy. they got a new zerg unit to make all this fair. see my signature
|
Transformer!! Viking in disguise. Destroy all Deceptitoss.
|
So what units are going away now? Btw I thought the reapers could mine minerals until I read the second part of their description
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Does anyone else think it would be cool if the Thor was a GIGANTIC SCV that could like, still repair stuff and its weapon was a gigantic version of the SCV welder ;D!?!?
I know I said something like this before but that would be so awesome!
On July 20 2007 07:41 alffla wrote:no one saw my scv THOR I saw it ;p
Did you actually draw that yourself btw? Cause it's pretty good :D
|
The one C&C feature that would ruin the game for me, (and I worry that it will be added), is aircraft needing to refill. The cobra, aka, flying missile bomb ship, is very similar to many bomber-esque units in C&C games, all whom would fly to the target, take their shots, then need to go home to get more ammo. I pray the cobra doesn't come with that handicap.
|
On July 20 2007 08:52 FrozenArbiter wrote:Does anyone else think it would be cool if the Thor was a GIGANTIC SCV that could like, still repair stuff and its weapon was a gigantic version of the SCV welder ;D!?!? I know I said something like this before but that would be so awesome! I saw it ;p
Hehe, to build thor get 10 SCVS to unite and they fuse together powerrangers style
|
|
terrans are C&C in space yo
lame
|
Is this all the units? Does this mean the science vessel is gone.
|
|
Terran is shaping up to look a lot like GDI. Are those Orca bombers I see?
|
On July 20 2007 07:29 rushz0rz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2007 21:16 Ziel wrote: 2. Tech-center & Reactor (2nd picture, and major change ever in starcraft 2) - These are new mechanism of add-on building. - Major production building (aka barrack, factory, starport) uses them. - Tech-center provides capability of creating high tech unit (Ex. medic in barrack, tank in factory) - Reactor provides capability of creating 2 units at same time. (Ex. 2 marines in barrack, 2 Vikings in Factory) - You can not connect both add-on to same building, so you can not train 2 high tech unit at same time (Ex. 2 medic in barrack) That is freakin' crazy...
in a good way or a bad way?
|
The phase prism is the transport for Protoss, and the Overlord is for the Zerg, but what about the transport unit for Terran?
Another thing: What is AoE? I keep thinking its Age of Empires
|
On July 20 2007 09:49 thoraxe wrote: One thing: What is AoE? I keep thinking its Age of Empires
Area of effect.
|
On July 20 2007 09:49 thoraxe wrote: What about the transport unit for Terran? The phase prism is the transport for Protoss, and the Overlord for Zerg.
One thing: What is AoE? I keep thinking its Age of Empires
aoe = area of effect
|
On July 20 2007 09:50 omgbnetsux wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 09:49 thoraxe wrote: One thing: What is AoE? I keep thinking its Age of Empires
seeing more bigArea of effect. Does this mean there'll be bigger pools of zergling blood now that the Battlecruiser has that plasma injection thing?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
The transport for the terran is still the dropship, as seen in the original gameplay video..
|
On the whole:
I am both happy and unhappy with this. I actually like thor, love the new ghost. I hate the maphacks given to terran and I especially hate all these damn addons.
Just seems completely uncessary, adding something just because someone in the development team had a new idea it seems.
|
On July 20 2007 10:09 pooper-scooper wrote: On the whole:
I am both happy and unhappy with this. I actually like thor, love the new ghost. I hate the maphacks given to terran and I especially hate all these damn addons.
Just seems completely uncessary, adding something just because someone in the development team had a new idea it seems.
|
On July 20 2007 09:50 AuraCoMO wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 09:49 thoraxe wrote: What about the transport unit for Terran? The phase prism is the transport for Protoss, and the Overlord for Zerg.
One thing: What is AoE? I keep thinking its Age of Empires
aoe = area of effect
AoE is Age of Empires (its a proper noun, thats why the A and the E are capitalized) aoe is area of effect
people who use AoE but mean aoe are being misleading
|
Can there be a viking hero unit called Optimus Prime?
Edit: Also, why the *constant* changing of names? Yamato cannon -> plasma injector? Change the effect, (AoE instead of a deathbeam), but no need to change the name...
|
On July 20 2007 08:37 maybenexttime wrote: Well, this way running Zealots won't defuse them. Also consider the fact that Protoss has to get in range to strike Terran forces, so simply place your mines where Protoss would halt his units in order to attack (that's early-mid game, no observers, unless there's some good way of killing them^^).
I was thinking it'd be fairly advantageous to Protoss because they could just run past, but your point sounds good. Maybe they are intended for the early-mid game and not necessarily for after (at least as far as the Terran push is concerned). I really am dying to see these in action... going to be interesting.
How will zealot shuttle drops on tanks work with mines around them? The zealot has to hold position for 2 seconds before the mines go off? Will the zealot live that long? I'm assuming the mines will still hurt friendlies. And actually... i wonder if vulture tank is going to turn into marine, reaper, mines, medic, cobra, tank? Shuttle drops may be out if marines are there to AA.
|
im wondering about the ghost's snipe ability, it seems pretty powerful, but since it does high damage to bionic units, itll mean to all zerg right? so snipe will pretty much destroy zerg armies, except for the fact that ghosts shoot friggin slow. hopefully theyll up the speed on this, put it on autocast, and have a 1 mp cost per shot... thatd be awesome, no more need for microing m&m. attack move ghosts to zergs base, gg.
also, from the 1st screenshot, it seemed that the lings werent attacking the submerged supply depots, does that mean that theyre not attackable when theyre underground or does that mean that with attack move, units will ignore submerged supply depots?
and as for the cobra, will it have a speed upgrade like the vulture, if thats the case, that thing will own with the proper micro, no need for patrolling. too bad it doesnt have mines though.
and the reapers mines... wtf, mines are supposed to blow up when someone walks over it, not blow up nonmoving things. i mean it is good that itll let you plant em near minerals so youll blow up workers too, but not working against moving units is retarded.
|
On July 20 2007 10:09 pooper-scooper wrote: On the whole:
I am both happy and unhappy with this. I actually like thor, love the new ghost. I hate the maphacks given to terran and I especially hate all these damn addons.
Why do you hate em?
|
On July 20 2007 10:44 tripleoptiks wrote: im wondering about the ghost's snipe ability, it seems pretty powerful, but since it does high damage to bionic units, itll mean to all zerg right? so snipe will pretty much destroy zerg armies, except for the fact that ghosts shoot friggin slow. hopefully theyll up the speed on this, put it on autocast, and have a 1 mp cost per shot... thatd be awesome, no more need for microing m&m. attack move ghosts to zergs base, gg.
Also nice for popping HT.
HT: "Cast Psionic Storm!" *head aslpode* Announcer: HEADSHOT ghost: keke
also, from the 1st screenshot, it seemed that the lings werent attacking the submerged supply depots, does that mean that theyre not attackable when theyre underground or does that mean that with attack move, units will ignore submerged supply depots?
I prefer that my lings target enemy units that can shoot back over buildings.
|
Hmm is it just me or does it look like the units and buildings have lost the grittiness feel of the original SC. The models are great, but they all look super-shiny like plastic pieces, and the textures on the models, especially with the closer look, look like it's done by Hasbro instead of battle-hardened units and buildings in an epic struggle.
|
On July 20 2007 10:41 Haemonculus wrote: Can there be a viking hero unit called Optimus Prime?
Edit: Also, why the *constant* changing of names? Yamato cannon -> plasma injector? Change the effect, (AoE instead of a deathbeam), but no need to change the name...
Who said it's not a different ability? BCs can't have two abilities or something?
|
On July 20 2007 10:48 Newbistic wrote: Hmm is it just me or does it look like the units and buildings have lost the grittiness feel of the original SC. The models are great, but they all look super-shiny like plastic pieces, and the textures on the models, especially with the closer look, look like it's done by Hasbro instead of battle-hardened units and buildings in an epic struggle.
I agree.
|
On July 20 2007 10:48 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 10:41 Haemonculus wrote: Can there be a viking hero unit called Optimus Prime?
Edit: Also, why the *constant* changing of names? Yamato cannon -> plasma injector? Change the effect, (AoE instead of a deathbeam), but no need to change the name... Who said it's not a different ability? BCs can't have two abilities or something?
Oh it's quite possible that it'll have two. I just wouldn't think them both to be "the BC shoots a large ball of death". I hope the yamato cannon sticks around.
|
In terms of the terran dropship, i remember them in the gameplay video having to land in order to unload units. i wonder if this will stay as is especially with the new functionality of vikings.
also, with the new phase prism acting as the transport for protoss, are they taking shuttle micro out altogether?
|
Vultures (Cobras) with shoot on the run... weird, reducing micro requirements I guess. Not sure I like that at all... but maybe it will work since Zealots have charge... but zerglings and workers won't have a chance. Yikes. At least you can stop 4 "vultures" in your probe line with 2 "goons" (no mines) instead of 8 b/c 6 goons died to mines when they came out of the gateways, etc.
Then again, reapers with mines are probably the new vultures. Still, if you stay in motion you can get past the mines... sounds a little more reasonable I guess. I sure hope cannons kill the reapers faster than in the videos though.
In love with the Banshee graphics!@
Viking still looks way too fat even after looking at it longer than a day.
Thor being fat somehow fits... it's growing on me.
Wondering about the Thor's role... what's going to happen in TvT? If tanks counter Thors, then there will be lots of Tank stand offs? Maybe not, since Banshees could be the new carriers for Terran.
BCs seem way way powerful... high hitpoints, flying, and a psi storm type special? I thought it was a huge argument that Sci Vessels were so good (almost too good) vs Zerg b/c they flew and did tons of damage to their important units partially due to AOE (even if mostly due to direct dmg with irrad). I'm surprised Blizzard is building on this and putting flying AOE on a Fighting unit. Ummm... wow, I might be playing a lot more Terran in the Beta. I wonder how impossible it will be to tech to BCs.
Ghost looks cool to me. Snipe sounds good. I very much want Defiler and High Temp to have something similar to deal with single low HP units though. The marine summon ... just doesn't fit in SC for me. But maybe it'll work.
Yes, I'm still weirded out about the radar stuff with Terran. I guess if it's on the minimap for the enemy, it may be ok. Kinda like overlords around your base for spotting. Now we just need some kickass Protoss scouting and map hackers will be crying a little bit more.
Generic add-ons... interesting. Mass marines early, move barrx, then mass metal later? Desperate for air? Move factories and put Starports on them?? Doesn't sound practical in a fast paced game... but maybe there will be a clean interface for moving buildings.
It's hard to see the new cannons, but I think I like 'em better than the floating ball.
|
That marine summon might be cool if it works more like a recall rather than a C&C style unit drop.
|
And I agree, add-ons have always been a royal pain. The huge Terran buildings in BW were messy enough without having to deal with add-ons. But, I think it's something we have to live with.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think, and hope, that they mean the mines wont move, not that they wont explode until the enemy is standing still.
I really dislike the cobra the more I think about it, vulture <3 And I don't think it looks cool at all. Loving the Thor more and more tho.
|
Mine concept seems a bit unnatural. Rather have it like this:
Mine has a radius of activation (say 1x1 pixel). As soon as an anemy usint walks in the range the mine pops up but does not move. the unit cannot attack the mine but other units can. Once the unit leaves the area, the mine chases and blows up.
|
On July 19 2007 21:54 mahnini wrote: Protoss absolutely pale in creativity compared to Terran. Thor is fucking huge, holy shit.
I thoroughly approve of Terran so far, Blizz. Bravo. Can't wait to see Zerg.
Remember how overpowered Protoss seemed before they released any Terran details? Yeah, not so much anymore. I can't fucking wait to see Zerg.
|
Wow. Some of these things sounds pretty cool (like SCV building Thor). Cant wait to see what theyll have for Zerg.
|
On July 20 2007 11:05 tochigi wrote:
also, with the new phase prism acting as the transport for protoss, are they taking shuttle micro out altogether?
phase prisms beam units down (and presumably up) like star trek. They only land when needed for supplying power for buildings and using the warp in function...
|
The new Terran units and buildings are incredible.
'Thor' is a weird name, but the unit is so beautiful especially for someone that likes Japanese style robot. Reminds me of Raiden from Virtual On.
I'm suprise about all the whining about the Terran unit name like Banshee, Cobra, etc. Those names aren't stolen from C&C. Anyone stopped to think about the naming of US military vehicle? I can understand if someone not get getting it when they don't live in USA, but to see someone whining with a US tag is LOL.
Odd no one has even mentioned that Blizzard is fixing or improving same race matchups. Teleporting dragoons to fix PvP where the remaining 20 minutes is waiting to die when someone gets contained. AOE Battlecruiers for long drawn out stalemate TvT matches in late game against a ultra defensive line of goliaths and tank. I can't wait to see what ZvZ will be like!
|
On July 20 2007 11:14 Blacklizard wrote: BCs seem way way powerful... high hitpoints, flying, and a psi storm type special? I thought it was a huge argument that Sci Vessels were so good (almost too good) vs Zerg b/c they flew and did tons of damage to their important units partially due to AOE (even if mostly due to direct dmg with irrad). I'm surprised Blizzard is building on this and putting flying AOE on a Fighting unit. Ummm... wow, I might be playing a lot more Terran in the Beta. I wonder how impossible it will be to tech to BCs.
BCs unlike the Sci Vessels, are slowwwwww. It's such a pain in the ass chasing down a Sci Vessel with scourges. The counters against BCs are more effective since a clumped group will get stormed, plagued, or anti-air-ed a lot easier. as well. The counter attack after taking out a big army of BCs is worse since BCs build significantly slower than most units.
|
I'd add it means the BC will be more than a meatshield with a yamato waiting... waiting... and waiting for energy. This is gonna be a real capital ship, and note the aoe attack is ground only, meaning air is definitively the way to go against these slow hulks. I think blizzard is definitively buffing air vs ground for each race, to tease players into switching to air power more often.
|
yay, they finally have terran, and it actually looks good, gotta c the tank update-_-
|
"Odd no one has even mentioned that Blizzard is fixing or improving same race matchups. Teleporting dragoons to fix PvP where the remaining 20 minutes is waiting to die when someone gets contained. AOE Battlecruiers for long drawn out stalemate TvT matches in late game against a ultra defensive line of goliaths and tank. I can't wait to see what ZvZ will be like!"
I think you are right about this being looked at by Blizzard, thank god. But I'm still worried about AOE BCs. Likely they'll be so hard to tech to that unless you are TvT it won't matter. But whenever we say this, someone always finds a way to tech to a unit, so it should be carefully balanced anyway.
PvP definitely can use some help... you could have a good point there. It's the early and early-midgame that is so funky for PvP I think.
ZvZ will be the trickiest I bet, because I have the feeling Mutas are still going to be very very powerful. I'd like to see them reduce Muta power and make zerg's ground better early on vs Terran... such that ground attacks after medics is doable. Who knows.
|
Ok, now I'm definitely gonna play terran in sc2, any race that can build a bar has to own
|
On July 20 2007 12:16 Seelys wrote: I'd add it means the BC will be more than a meatshield with a yamato waiting... waiting... and waiting for energy. This is gonna be a real capital ship, and note the aoe attack is ground only, meaning air is definitively the way to go against these slow hulks. I think blizzard is definitively buffing air vs ground for each race, to tease players into switching to air power more often.
They need to be really careful with making air too good vs ground. Or it will be ling/muta and the equivalent for every race. Air units are good b/c of mobility... once they start countering ground units that have anti-air, and they are already invulnerable to melee units... well, guess what?
|
On July 20 2007 00:43 Tiku wrote:
At first, I was "Man, thats a lot of Thor units". Then I looked to the upper-left and I was ":O"
|
Reapers mines could just be demolition charges, which they use to blow up buildings and not mines, since the transolations doesn't make sence, but they mention it's used vs non-moving units, which could mean just buildings, not normal units... could someone make a better translation of the article? I would really apreciate it.
|
On July 20 2007 13:10 lololol wrote: Reapers mines could just be demolition charges, which they use to blow up buildings and not mines, since the transolations doesn't make sence, but they mention it's used vs non-moving units, which could mean just buildings, not normal units... could someone make a better translation of the article? I would really apreciate it.
Yeah when I read the description I thought it meant that they would:
-Walk up to building -Stand next to it for a certain amount of time (deploying mines) -"Get outta there, it's gonna blow!" -Mines detonate damaging the building
I see it as like C&C commando style.
|
On July 20 2007 13:08 useless wrote:At first, I was "Man, thats a lot of Thor units". Then I looked to the upper-left and I was ":O"
Good point... the Viking may be fat, but it's actually not super big afterall... it's smaller than a siege tank... this pict has to be zoomed as well (look at the assimilator size). OK, I can deal with a medium sized short squat unit a little better than a huge big fat unit that looks like a factory. Still not as cool as a goliath, but at least it transforms.
|
blizzard, u crazy mofos!
love the game so far!
|
On July 20 2007 13:08 useless wrote:At first, I was "Man, thats a lot of Thor units". Then I looked to the upper-left and I was ":O"
Tank looks better guys, anyone else notice?
|
imba gay terran in sc2 again ;D
stop crying plzzzz....
OMG WC4 GONNA BE SC2 IN MIDDLEAGE NOOOOOZ
|
|
On July 20 2007 14:49 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 13:08 useless wrote:On July 20 2007 00:43 Tiku wrote: At first, I was "Man, thats a lot of Thor units". Then I looked to the upper-left and I was ":O" Tank looks better guys, anyone else notice?
They still look like crap.
|
On July 20 2007 06:45 Haemonculus wrote: Edit: I also absolutely hate the reapers. Totally doesn't fit in with the terran army imho. An easy fix would be to replace those pistols with flamethrowers and make then new age flying firebats! I agree with this 100% and have been saying this since day 1.. Flamethrowers would make Reapers instant-freakin-awesome, and would fit their role as heavy mobile infantry very well... Pistols are just so... mehh
|
Nuke doesn't look bad.
The Reaper looks kinda cool but not really StarCraft. And they should definitely be called Marauders instead.
Same shitty Termite suit as before on the Ghost. Please change. Also, Snipe sounds like a reject from a C&C game. The summoning Marines is a stock C&C power. Unit production structures produce units, end of story.
Plasma Injection sounds lame. Makes Battlecruisers too powerful.
I'm still wait or see on the Viking. But honestly I'm not too excited. If it's a walker it can attack ground units, if it's a fighter it can attack air units. I care why?
The Banshee is a C&C reject. Lose this shit. It even looks like an Orca fighter. Fucking please, seriously.
The Reaper mine sounds completely useless.
Thor being built by an SCV is a neat idea. Hopefully the unit itself doesn't suck. Honestly though it just sounds like a better Seige Tank, which does nothing but make the game harder to balance while adding exactly zero to it. Thor is still a shitty name too.
If they want to bring back the Vulture then bring back the Vulture. Don't give me a less cool and less useful version and call it "The Cobra." Also, how will shooting on the run be handled?
Good to see Range and Stimpacks back. StarCraft II wouldn't be a sequel to StarCraft without them. What's the sheild upgrade though? And why is an armor upgrade necessary?
The CC being able to carry 5 SCV's while lifting off is a great idea. You could go even further and make it a lesser capacity Dropship. The Planetary Fortress isn't a bad idea but the graphics and name look kinda shitty.
The Tech Center is actually a neat idea because it means that one add-on will be compatible with every Terran building, which will open up tons of new possibilities. Plus that kind of technology is exactly what the Terrans in the story will do. Please for the love of god don't call it the tech-center. This is not Command and Conquer. The graphics could use an upgrade too. It looks too neat and polished for a Terran structure. The building extra unit thing also doesn't sound like a good idea. Production buildings build units, and nothing else. Go down to the StarCraft section of this article, where purity of purpose is discussed: http://www.sirlin.net/archive/game-balance-part-1/
Bunkers are back, yay. Again, StarCraft isn't really StarCraft without them.
Get rid of the Sensor Dome and the Radar Dome!!! I'm serious. There are a lot of problems so far in StarCraft II, but these two buildings are by far the worst. The Sensor Dome serves a purpose already served by the Missile Turret. The Sensor Dome is just another building that needs to be balanced otherwise it will either be overpowered or simply not used, and for no good reason since, again, the Missile Turret already detects Stealth. The Radar Dome is ripped straight from C&C, and was a major part of why those games don't have the competitive depth that StarCraft does. If the fog of war is not uncovered you cannot see any of the enemy's units under it, period. Otherwise the ability of the enemy to conduct covert operations is completely destroyed. This is not hard to understand, professional RTS designers should be able to figure out what some kid who plays video games in his spare time has figured out on his own.
The supply depots going underground needs to be thought out well or else it will either be simple to the point where the game's depth is diluted, or it will be overly complex to move them to the position you want them in. Plus they still look like furnaces, hopefully that will be changed.
If Missile Turrets detect stealth, then once again, the Sensor dome is not necessary. And really, being able to detect stealth is what makes the Missile Turret more than just a generic AA building.
I don't want to completely shit on Blizzard and Dustin Browder, because they sorta know what's going on and they seem like good guys. But when the majority of what you're doing in a game is not good, something is very very wrong.
|
love the Thor and everything from Terran looks very powerful and dynamic so far... Only a few complaints, like how Ghosts look a little weak right now and I don't like the sensor thing
overall, i think it's a great step in the right direction for SC2 and I can't wait to see this game in action!
|
I still feel besides maybe Thor and the Marine, Terran really haven't impressed me much.
The Tower sound really lame. I am such a bad T player I can't feel for T changes as severely but the units seem a lil lame, even in design.
|
DTDominion : it could be that turrets aren't detectors anymore, but just what they're supposed to be : AA turrets. Perhaps Blizzard wants to remove the quite imba scan and let Terrans have their own detector specitif strenght and weakness.
And radar domes are not C&C specific but a quite obvious military structure in any modern army. The way they seems to function reminds me rather of total annihilation if you absolutly want a rippoff source. This will provide information on the minimap, on a yet unknown scale, the fow is still here and you'd have to go see yourself to identify units. And we don't know of science vessels... terrans don't have invisible observers nor (maybe) cheap overlords everywhere. Making the race differents means that each one may have strenghts that appear quite unfair in reguard to the others. Like zerg could produce all from the same building... sounds unfair... works as intended. So for one, if scan is removed, I'd say radar may fit the Terran strenght and weakness board.
Same for the rest. BC with injections will make them more a threat by themselves, and BC are not anymore in the BW universe. Now they face warprays, designed to take them down. They'll have to face yet unknown creatures from the swarm. Terrans cannot use tank to hold off immortals, I have the feeling Blizzard aims for effective and threatening air to ground, because mutalisk aside air warfare was only an option in stalemate/long battles.
|
Wait wait. Scan was imbalanced?
Why does the Sensor Dome being different make it good?
|
The thor is too big i think, i think you should be capable of getting 1 into a dropship (6-8 slots)
And the pew pew vulture sounds incredibly lame, completely out of style with terran. SAME with the reaper (horrible horrible idea)
And the tank still seems to look awful... Why cant they make it into a shiny little metallic tank? not a toy?
|
I think they just need to tweak the designs a little to give them a more Terran feel, especially the Bashee. And I want to see what effect the Cobra will have on game play.. I mean they are fast moving units that can shoot while moving... They are going to be freaking invincible.
|
On July 20 2007 18:46 fuglyfrog wrote: I think they just need to tweak the designs a little to give them a more Terran feel, especially the Bashee. And I want to see what effect the Cobra will have on game play.. I mean they are fast moving units that can shoot while moving... They are going to be freaking invincible.
That's what the Vultures essentially were. What worries me is that the Cobra will make it possible to do this without microing. Or even worse, that this added "feature" will just make the Cobra needlessly difficult to control.
|
On July 20 2007 18:20 FatRine wrote: The thor is too big i think, i think you should be capable of getting 1 into a dropship (6-8 slots)
And the pew pew vulture sounds incredibly lame, completely out of style with terran. SAME with the reaper (horrible horrible idea)
And the tank still seems to look awful... Why cant they make it into a shiny little metallic tank? not a toy?
Read carefully -_-
- Siege tank got some graphical upgrade, and it will be showed in Blizzcon.
DTDominion, now I see what is WHINE
|
On July 20 2007 18:57 InRaged wrote: DTDominion, now I see what is WHINE
Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining.
|
hey, new here and i cant post my own topics for 10 days and idk where else to look sorry for this spam , even though this is a sc site, i need a cdkey grabber for wc3 if u could get me a working link id be happy!
|
On July 20 2007 19:09 AndrewRenn wrote:hey, new here and i cant post my own topics for 10 days and idk where else to look sorry for this spam , even though this is a sc site, i need a cdkey grabber for wc3 if u could get me a working link id be happy! LMAO... fastest ban ever!
|
And the pew pew vulture sounds incredibly lame, completely out of style with terran. SAME with the reaper (horrible horrible idea)
Can anyone give me an actually good reason the Reaper is a "horrible horrible" idea?
|
On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining.
explain yourself
|
On July 20 2007 19:13 Gokey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 19:09 AndrewRenn wrote:hey, new here and i cant post my own topics for 10 days and idk where else to look sorry for this spam , even though this is a sc site, i need a cdkey grabber for wc3 if u could get me a working link id be happy! LMAO... fastest ban ever!
Wtf, he isn't banned yet.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On July 20 2007 08:52 FrozenArbiter wrote:Does anyone else think it would be cool if the Thor was a GIGANTIC SCV that could like, still repair stuff and its weapon was a gigantic version of the SCV welder ;D!?!? I know I said something like this before but that would be so awesome! I saw it ;p Did you actually draw that yourself btw? Cause it's pretty good :D
haha sorta took a screenshot of a scv then enlarged it by 19512059 then added the extra guns n shit
|
On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining.
:S What's wrong with you? Just because he's born in Japan he's not allowed to criticize whiners? I'm not even sure I know what reference you're making... Are Japanese people notorious whiners? You're from the USA. Americans have contributed their fair share of whine-posts.
Sorry, I just don't see where you're pulling the Japan/Whine association from.
Edit: sorry for off topic
|
On July 20 2007 10:41 Haemonculus wrote: Can there be a viking hero unit called Optimus Prime?
Edit: Also, why the *constant* changing of names? Yamato cannon -> plasma injector? Change the effect, (AoE instead of a deathbeam), but no need to change the name...
OPTIMUS FTW!
|
On July 20 2007 19:09 AndrewRenn wrote:hey, new here and i cant post my own topics for 10 days and idk where else to look sorry for this spam , even though this is a sc site, i need a cdkey grabber for wc3 if u could get me a working link id be happy!
nice first post /sarcasm.
|
On July 20 2007 20:25 prOxi.swAMi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:On July 20 2007 18:57 InRaged wrote: DTDominion, now I see what is WHINE Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining. :S What's wrong with you? Just because he's born in Japan he's not allowed to criticize whiners? I'm not even sure I know what reference you're making... Are Japanese people notorious whiners? You're from the USA. Americans have contributed their fair share of whine-posts. Sorry, I just don't see where you're pulling the Japan/Whine association from.
same, I have no idea where he got that generalization from.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 20 2007 19:09 AndrewRenn wrote:hey, new here and i cant post my own topics for 10 days and idk where else to look sorry for this spam , even though this is a sc site, i need a cdkey grabber for wc3 if u could get me a working link id be happy! Not that I have any idea where to get a cd key grabber (assuming he wants to find his own cdkey) but why don't you try a war3 forum, like http://www.wcreplays.com ?
Btw, I sometimes feel like not being able to create new threads for 10 days is a bit severe..
On topic:
I think everyone should stop complaining about the ghost - didn't you see it in the gameplay video (the very first one!?)? NOT A SINGLE PERSON COMPLAINED.
Why? Cause they look just like the SC 1 ghosts (great).
Btw, DTDominion, I agree with a lot of what you said in your post (sensor dome is gah) but the Viking can definitely become a fun unit.
Flying around with vikings and tanks in dships, securing cliffs or attacking islands sounds fun.
If the animation to transform from mech to airplane is fast maybe you can even dodge attacks with it.
|
i really do not like how the barracks and the supply depots look like. also the zerglings =[ or banelings (watever they are called)
seriosuly, it looks like those old fake sc2 units from the C+C mod. but thor is Freaking amazing.. wow. i too, agree with everyone in here that approves of terran so far. im pretty sure i would love using reapers.
|
Does anyone know how the Cobra will exactly work out on their attacks? If they move while attack and they move away from their target outside of their radius of attack, do they come back and hit the same unit again? Do they stop short of their radius and then just continue to pummel rushing Zealots? For example, if I do an attack move and my Cobra runs into a Zealot heading towards him, does he shoot, get hit by the Zealot rush in and then zip by, acting as if it didn't exist? I think they should just be like the Vulture in terms of execution and attack. If we wanted Vultures to attack and run away, we use Patrol and then right-click, I don't see why Attack Move has to do that for us, considering Attack Move is all about standing your ground next to an opponent when you see them and just attacking them to no end.
|
On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining.
Fuck you. You know nothing about Japanese people and you sure as hell don't know if they're whiny or not. Gtfo
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 20 2007 17:50 Seelys wrote: DTDominion : it could be that turrets aren't detectors anymore, but just what they're supposed to be : AA turrets. Perhaps Blizzard wants to remove the quite imba scan and let Terrans have their own detector specitif strenght and weakness.
And radar domes are not C&C specific but a quite obvious military structure in any modern army. The way they seems to function reminds me rather of total annihilation if you absolutly want a rippoff source. This will provide information on the minimap, on a yet unknown scale, the fow is still here and you'd have to go see yourself to identify units. And we don't know of science vessels... terrans don't have invisible observers nor (maybe) cheap overlords everywhere. Making the race differents means that each one may have strenghts that appear quite unfair in reguard to the others. Like zerg could produce all from the same building... sounds unfair... works as intended. So for one, if scan is removed, I'd say radar may fit the Terran strenght and weakness board.
Same for the rest. BC with injections will make them more a threat by themselves, and BC are not anymore in the BW universe. Now they face warprays, designed to take them down. They'll have to face yet unknown creatures from the swarm. Terrans cannot use tank to hold off immortals, I have the feeling Blizzard aims for effective and threatening air to ground, because mutalisk aside air warfare was only an option in stalemate/long battles. Uhm yeah so instead of having the 'imbalanced' (I don't think it is) scan you want to have a radar dome that makes you impervious to any kind of surprise attack.
Then you talk about the science vessel possibly being removed, meaning that either they get a new detection unit (I don't see why you'd remove the science vessel only to replace it with some new detection unit, they are pretty cool), the Radar Dome detects invisible units all over the map (loooooool) or they still have scan in addition to their radar domes.
If the radar dome does not detect invisible units all over the map vessels will have to become a lot more low tech or terran will be stuck in base forever, assuming no scan. I really don't see a single good reason for removing the scan and adding in something like the radar dome.
Yes, the radar dome sounds cool, real military have radar, it's fun etcetc, but until they tell me exactly how it works I'm gonna be very sceptical cause from what they have told us so far (about this particular unit) I have every reason to be.
In conclusion; I think the scanner allowed terran to actually leave their base before being high tech and added a unique feature to the race. I don't like the idea of a radar dome, limited in its area of detection or otherwise. I liked it in TA, and it sounds cool, but then I stop and think about how 'fun' it will be when terran sees a huge drop coming from several screens away and moves all his units back to base.
Bleh. The system in SC worked exceptionally well and was fun, this is one of those situations where you should just leave well enough alone IMO.
|
On July 20 2007 21:50 Evilmonkey. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:On July 20 2007 18:57 InRaged wrote: DTDominion, now I see what is WHINE Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining. Fuck you. You know nothing about Japanese people and you sure as hell don't know if they're whiny or not. Gtfo
I'm mostly refering to the Japanese reaction to WWII. Whenever China and Korea bring up the abuses inflicted on them your country acts victimized. Whenever the anniversary of the atomic bombings comes around, it's basically an excuse to act victimized.
Honestly though, it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. It's not like I hate Japan or anything (I begged my parents to let me participate in a Japanese home stay program). And this isn't a politics thread, so if you want to reply use PM I guess.
EDIT: http://www.gaijinsmash.net/archives/taking_responsibility.phtml
More than anything I just find it funny that InRaged thinks I'm a whiner. Maybe the changes being introduced in SC2 just aren't very good?
|
DTDominion, you realise you have United States next to your name right?
|
On July 20 2007 22:15 FatRine wrote: DTDominion, you realise you have United States next to your name right?
I would hope so, I selected it as my country when I created my account.
|
On July 20 2007 22:19 DTDominion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 22:15 FatRine wrote: DTDominion, you realise you have United States next to your name right?
I would hope so, I selected it as my country when I created my account.
great that means you should shut up about japan, imo
|
Dude if you want to lecture me do it over PM or something, jeeze.
|
DTDominion, I on my side don't find funny how you threw random generalization hurting not only me, but Japanese on this forum and doesn't even feel sorry for that
Maybe the changes being introduced in SC2 just aren't very good? you called most of introduced changes useless, imbalanced and ripped of from c&c. You know, that's a very precise critique based on screenshots and rough captions for the game that doesn't stepped yet into balance correction phase.
|
On July 20 2007 22:31 InRaged wrote: you called most of introduced changes useless, imbalanced and ripped of from c&c. You know, that's a very precise critique based on screenshots and rough captions for the game that doesn't stepped yet into balance correction phase.
Imprecise, but yet I haven't seen why I'm incorrect. FA has explained quite well why the Sensor Towers are a horrible idea. Anything else you'd like further explanation about?
|
On July 20 2007 22:07 DTDominion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2007 21:50 Evilmonkey. wrote:On July 20 2007 19:03 DTDominion wrote:On July 20 2007 18:57 InRaged wrote: DTDominion, now I see what is WHINE Lawls. A Japanese person talking about whining. Fuck you. You know nothing about Japanese people and you sure as hell don't know if they're whiny or not. Gtfo I'm mostly refering to the Japanese reaction to WWII. Whenever China and Korea bring up the abuses inflicted on them your country acts victimized. Whenever the anniversary of the atomic bombings comes around, it's basically an excuse to act victimized. Honestly though, it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. It's not like I hate Japan or anything (I begged my parents to let me go on a Japanese home exchange). And this isn't a politics thread, so if you want to reply use PM I guess. EDIT: http://www.gaijinsmash.net/archives/taking_responsibility.phtmlMore than anything I just find it funny that InRaged thinks I'm a whiner. Maybe the changes being introduced in SC2 just aren't very good?
I like how he thinks Japanese are particularly whiny while he wanted to move over there in a foreign exchange program.
The new radars could work exactly how the comsat worked with the addtion of detection around the building, just under the guise of a new name and not as an addon.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Wow, he made an inappropriate comment about the Japanese, BIG DEAL. TL.net is basically full of people going 'lol americans' everytime Bush opens his mouth..
|
On July 20 2007 20:25 prOxi.swAMi wrote: :S What's wrong with you? Just because he's born in Japan he's not allowed to criticize whiners? I'm not even sure I know what reference you're making... Are Japanese people notorious whiners? You're from the USA. Americans have contributed their fair share of whine-posts.
Sorry, I just don't see where you're pulling the Japan/Whine association from.
Fair share would be an understatement. It feels like 99% of the whine-posts (not SC2 related) have the USA tag and the others in US hiding behind a foreign country tag.
Back to topic, I don't like the vulture replacement mainly because it takes away skill. I hope Blizzard meant that it has the ability to attack while moving with micro similar to Tanks.
|
Radar dome makes "impervious" one base from surprise attacks : we don't know how many screens are scanned by the thing, its tech level or cost, and still, quicks drops are difficult to counter, even if spotted a few second away : the Terran player would have to keep a defense force on the move in proximity. On the contrary it would be rather difficult to sneak in a rather large assaut force. And as said, it could be used as a decoy against terrans players : are these 5 spots crowded overlords or 5 scourges ? (hypothetical, since zerg are going a major revamp)
Scan were balanced in the end but still, by the way it functionned it sounded like a "oops I forgot to have detector here but there, my magic button will save my a** " : I mean, shouldn't we wait for people to actually test the radar before calling for removal of it ? SC II won't be TA, were radars scanned large distances, ground units were fairly slow, and static defenses plentiful and hominous.
|
Shut up about the japan thing already, let's get on bashing the Radar Dome. If it works like in TA I really don't want it in the game. Maybe it wouldn't be that bad if it only extended detection for half a screen but then the purpose is questionable. It's never going to be as good as scan anyway, so plz keep scan in the game. It fits the terran especially well, with their strong but hard-to-use abilities.
|
Yeah the radardome sounds awful, even if its fun id rather have scan cause it's a unique thing for terran..
The radardome just sounds like some sort of reversed Gap Generator from the red alert series...
It sounds like a lame superweapon. Just like the mothership.
|
On July 21 2007 02:39 aseq wrote: Shut up about the japan thing already, let's get on bashing the Radar Dome. If it works like in TA I really don't want it in the game. Maybe it wouldn't be that bad if it only extended detection for half a screen but then the purpose is questionable. It's never going to be as good as scan anyway, so plz keep scan in the game. It fits the terran especially well, with their strong but hard-to-use abilities.
Scan is hard to use? Are you drunk or something?
|
On July 21 2007 03:05 FatRine wrote: The radardome just sounds like some sort of reversed Gap Generator from the red alert series...
OR it sounds like, I dunno, RADAR? wtf is wrong with people, trying to find C&C similarities in everything?
|
sushiman, oh, thanks. I thought, I'm only one who can't stand it
On July 21 2007 02:39 aseq wrote: Maybe it wouldn't be that bad if it only extended detection for half a screen but then the purpose is questionable. It's never going to be as good as scan anyway, so plz keep scan in the game. It fits the terran especially well, with their strong but hard-to-use abilities. roflcopter are you joking
|
is that a add on to a command center?
|
Thats the planetary fortress
|
Netherlands19124 Posts
Let me repeat myself on the dome, I'm still of opinion that you can read into the descriptions (roughly translated as they are) that the sensor dome is a static detector, I believe we have seen detection removed from cannons so maybe they did the same for turrets and is this our new alltype static detector.
Added to that you can upgrade it to a radar dome which I believe just upgrades it to a stand alone scan instead of being an addon to a CC. This seems even more plausible imho seeing how they are trying to rework the whole addon thing. Meaning that it's just a scanner with passive detection as a standalone building.
You can read the current scan ability perfectly into the description of the radar dome. Yes you can read it as well as a Total Annihilation radar array but that's not gonna happen knowing blizzard. I'm sticking with stand alone Scan.
p.s. why the hell to people need to get this hostile and bad mannered, Fatrine you are the worst and most bad mannered poster in this subforum at least. Why the need? As for the rest try to get a grip, there's still the line between criticism and unfunded whine and complaints which are equal to spam and are really annoying for thread 'atmosphere'.
edit: Meh proven wrong by german game magazine, still hope they change it though, along with a balancing factor because atm the amount of scan is limited by the amount of CC's you have and should as such have a balancing factor (such as highly increased energy cost) if you remove that limiting factor on your scanners.
p.p.s. anyone wondered what they are gonna do with nuke silos?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think removing detection from cannons would be a horribly limiting choice as it now essentially means you have to get fast observers every time PvP and probably PvZ as well if lurkers are still in the game (if they have removed the lurkers I'll be pissed -.-).
|
Haha the new screens from that German article are pretty nice. Those Thors don't fuck around, they mean business.
|
|
Netherlands19124 Posts
On July 21 2007 08:39 FrozenArbiter wrote: I think removing detection from cannons would be a horribly limiting choice as it now essentially means you have to get fast observers every time PvP and probably PvZ as well if lurkers are still in the game (if they have removed the lurkers I'll be pissed -.-). Agreed.
I wouldnt mind having it gone from turrets though if sensor dome isnt too expensive and too hard techwise to get. (read: out of the way of what you're actually doing)
Current thing seems lame and un SC, but not as bad as the potential "summon marines" which would be totally fubar imho.
|
I think the game itself looks great, but for some reason I'm just not looking forward to SC2. I don't think it has the same feel to it.
|
i hope planetary fortress can shoot while lifted
that would be a little bit AMAZING
|
well, cannon were basically both AA and anti ground + detector... I'm not against making base defense simple but... don't tell me that with all these "newb" UI features they gonna make into the game people won't find some APM to deal with more complex defensive arsenal. And phase cannons now are moving babies... we don't want cloaked units to be that useless don't we ?
And explain to me : what is basically something "unSC" ? something which wasn't in SC ? or more precisely any feature existing in any other RTS but not in SC ?
|
I think something unSC would be things that exists in other RTS games that didn't in SC and the game is better cause of it.
aka stuff like WMD from C&C, theres nukes in SC but you need a ghost to launch it and even then the ghost could be killed. In C&C if you dont kill the nuclear silo fast enough or even the Weather Machine, they're gonna own your base.
but wth do I know.
|
I wonder if the Thor can be hit by anti air like the Colossus. And if it can't, I wonder if the Colossus/Reapers can step/hop over it.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 21 2007 14:43 Seelys wrote: well, cannon were basically both AA and anti ground + detector... I'm not against making base defense simple but... don't tell me that with all these "newb" UI features they gonna make into the game people won't find some APM to deal with more complex defensive arsenal. And phase cannons now are moving babies... we don't want cloaked units to be that useless don't we ?
And explain to me : what is basically something "unSC" ? something which wasn't in SC ? or more precisely any feature existing in any other RTS but not in SC ? Heroes are un-SC. "Special abilities" (ie "call in airstrike", "call in paratroopers") are un-SC.
It's really hard to put into words what I feel is un-SC, but I guess it's basically.. anything that needlessly complicates the game? Bleh, that's not exactly it either. Maybe I'll be able to express my feelings on this in the morning, cause that's basically what it is - a feeling. There have been changes made that I don't care about cause they don't interfer with what starcraft is so don't try to say 'oh but anything new will feel strange'.
|
On July 21 2007 15:25 XCetron wrote: I think something unSC would be things that exists in other RTS games that didn't in SC and the game is better cause of it.
aka stuff like WMD from C&C, theres nukes in SC but you need a ghost to launch it and even then the ghost could be killed. In C&C if you dont kill the nuclear silo fast enough or even the Weather Machine, they're gonna own your base.
I KNOW EVERTHING
i made it better, and then quoted it for truth
|
"What should we do with the Thor?"
"Put a shitload of guns and missles on it!" =D
=/
|
On July 21 2007 22:57 caution.slip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2007 15:25 XCetron wrote: I think something unSC would be things that exists in other RTS games that didn't in SC and the game is better cause of it.
aka stuff like WMD from C&C, theres nukes in SC but you need a ghost to launch it and even then the ghost could be killed. In C&C if you dont kill the nuclear silo fast enough or even the Weather Machine, they're gonna own your base.
I KNOW EVERTHING i made it better, and then quoted it for truth
I cant tell if thats sarcasm or not. T_T
|
Damn that crap looks awesome
|
On July 21 2007 23:17 XCetron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2007 22:57 caution.slip wrote:On July 21 2007 15:25 XCetron wrote: I think something unSC would be things that exists in other RTS games that didn't in SC and the game is better cause of it.
aka stuff like WMD from C&C, theres nukes in SC but you need a ghost to launch it and even then the ghost could be killed. In C&C if you dont kill the nuclear silo fast enough or even the Weather Machine, they're gonna own your base.
I KNOW EVERTHING i made it better, and then quoted it for truth I cant tell if thats sarcasm or not. T_T
i'm being sincere, stuff like attack move was a great idea (RA didn't have it) and other stuff like unstoppable nukes is terrible
|
somebody probably already posted this but just in case:
it might have an impact on build orders that the add ons are the same for all the buildings
for example
1. you build a barracks
2. get factory and get add-on for the barracks
3. lift-off barracks and build starport in it's place
something like that, or maybe if you need something between barracks and factory, you'd be able to get tanks faster
|
well i am a retard for saying "it might have an impact", it will definitely have an impact lol
|
you said unevitable nukes were unSC whereas ghost launchd one could fit (and are sooo easy to use they actually aren't use ^^) So logically a ghost called marines' drop would be Scish, isn't it? :D Nah, I presume these marines have to be produced first anyway.
|
Well, that's their main idea with the exchangable addons between multiple building types, it makes it viable to switch your production between different unit types, which can't be done without spending a lot of resources on new production buildings in BW. It makes terran more flexible and versatile(just like the warp in for toss, but considering mainly mobility, althought it affects production, too).
|
On July 22 2007 02:23 GroT wrote: somebody probably already posted this but just in case:
it might have an impact on build orders that the add ons are the same for all the buildings
for example
1. you build a barracks
2. get factory and get add-on for the barracks
3. lift-off barracks and build starport in it's place
something like that, or maybe if you need something between barracks and factory, you'd be able to get tanks faster
Intresting idea That would realy make terran buildorders a lot more interesting.
|
SC is fast and dynamic.
A big artillery piece of a robot is not fast and dynamic.
A map revealer is not fast and dynamic.
Removing detection from Turrets and Cannons makes them less dynamic.
There's a reason people fear SC2 being more like C&C. Battlecruisers are more fast and dynamic units than most units in C&C.
|
Siege tank is less dynamic than any possible unit ever. Oh, oops. Wrong side!
On July 22 2007 03:13 lololol wrote: Well, that's their main idea with the exchangable addons between multiple building types, it makes it viable to switch your production between different unit types, which can't be done without spending a lot of resources on new production buildings in BW. It makes terran more flexible and versatile(just like the warp in for toss, but considering mainly mobility, althought it affects production, too). And again this looks like now they're trying to renew concept they tried to realize in BW, but couldn't get to work as they wished
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
|
They're removing detection from cannons and turrets? I really hope they don't screw with detection too much, it's perfect how it is. Neccessary but not too hard for the defending player if they expect cloaked units.
|
i don't see why people are like "Why get rid of the old units?" Of the ten we've seen, five of them are from SC/BW. that's more than toss, iirc.
i personally love what's been revealed, and don't have any complaints.
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
they should get even more intense effects for the nuke explosion
|
On July 22 2007 12:54 DTDominion wrote: SC is fast and dynamic.
A big artillery piece of a robot is not fast and dynamic.
A map revealer is not fast and dynamic.
Removing detection from Turrets and Cannons makes them less dynamic.
There's a reason people fear SC2 being more like C&C. Battlecruisers are more fast and dynamic units than most units in C&C.
Not everything in SC is fast and dynamic. Reaver is not fast, you need to use shuttle So maybe you can build thor in the place your push continues at the moment, with scvs
Cannons are more dynamic in Sc2 with their mobility than they are in Sc1
Many units in Sc2 are quite fast and dynamic: stalker, reaper, vicking, cobra, zealot, colossus (not fast(faster than reaver though) but terrain dynamic), marines(as Sc1 i assume).
The air however until now seems to lack the pace of Sc1 without scouts and (maybe) wraiths. I dont know about the map revealer. Maybe it will make terrans more mobile showing them possible flaws in enemy's potitions, maybe it will make their enemies less mobile though, not giving them chances of drops and traps.
I agree with you though that detection shouldnt be removed by turrets and cannons.
We ll see. Sorry for my bad english
|
On July 22 2007 16:25 Titanidis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2007 12:54 DTDominion wrote: SC is fast and dynamic.
A big artillery piece of a robot is not fast and dynamic.
A map revealer is not fast and dynamic.
Removing detection from Turrets and Cannons makes them less dynamic.
There's a reason people fear SC2 being more like C&C. Battlecruisers are more fast and dynamic units than most units in C&C. Not everything in SC is fast and dynamic. Reaver is not fast, you need to use shuttle So maybe you can build thor in the place your push continues at the moment, with scvs Cannons are more dynamic in Sc2 with their mobility than they are in Sc1 Many units in Sc2 are quite fast and dynamic: stalker, reaper, vicking, cobra, zealot, colossus (not fast(faster than reaver though) but terrain dynamic), marines(as Sc1 i assume). The air however until now seems to lack the pace of Sc1 without scouts and (maybe) wraiths. I dont know about the map revealer. Maybe it will make terrans more mobile showing them possible flaws in enemy's potitions, maybe it will make their enemies less mobile though, not giving them chances of drops and traps. I agree with you though that detection shouldnt be removed by turrets and cannons. We ll see. Sorry for my bad english ANY CNC thing and influence in Starcraft 2 will ruin it period. Emperor battle for Dune was fast and dynamic but was still a bad game. The issue is not about speed, because they already put speed and dynamic play as a high priority, the real issue is about CNC'ying starcraft 2 which will completely ruin it, noobify it, destroy it, and take away every feeling that made the original starcraft so good. Don't even try to give me the "THIS IS STARCRAFT 2 NOT STARCRAFT!!!!!!!!@@121212!!!@!@@!@!@ )010101101010101" crap, a proper sequel to starcraft needs to very similar to starcraft as possible. If it is noobified and CNCied then starcraft is ruined, I can't believe people hear are being so stupid.
Having an open mind is not always a good thing, and I thought you guys wouldn't care about how the game itself will work not how it looks in some stupid pictures, geuss I was mistaken about the average intelligence of the average Tl.net user. If you want this game to be a masterpiece then we have to modify it as much as possible to make it perfect, even it is in its alpha stages.
|
On July 22 2007 16:44 Duffybeer wrote:
Having an open mind is not always a good thing
I rest my case
|
Seriously now, how much did you contibuted in the making of sc1?
My point is I dont know if compaining and changing things without actually testing it will make it better or worse, do you? And I m not flaming anyone, ehy you do that?
|
Alot of these discussions are similar, and go in a cycle. They won't get put to rest until beta, where we can actually see what the game is like.
However, I do have to say that I am disappointed that so many of the units previewed so far have similar concepts to other games, and those other games were very, very bad.
In contrast to that, I trust Blizzard will take tired and cliche concepts and apply them in ways that will revitalize the RTS industry in the same way that StarCraft did.
On the flip side once more, WarCraft III was an absolute bomb. I don't care how popular it was; it was simply not classified in the right genre. WarCraft III is not at all in the same category as StarCraft. WarCraft III is in the same category as the Sims: games for people who aren't that into games.
And in contrast yet another time, I hope Blizzard learned from their WarCraft III mistakes. From the comments they make, it seems like they have. I'm liking the potential for tactical interplay between T and P so far.
I think it'll be good.
|
Edit: Sorry what I said was not really clear as I made many silly mistakes in my earlier post.
|
On July 22 2007 17:32 garmule2 wrote: Alot of these discussions are similar, and go in a cycle. They won't get put to rest until beta, where we can actually see what the game is like.
However, I do have to say that I am disappointed that so many of the units previewed so far have similar concepts to other games, and those other games were very, very bad.
In contrast to that, I trust Blizzard will take tired and cliche concepts and apply them in ways that will revitalize the RTS industry in the same way that StarCraft did.
On the flip side once more, WarCraft III was an absolute bomb. I don't care how popular it was; it was simply not classified in the right genre. WarCraft III is not at all in the same category as StarCraft. WarCraft III is in the same category as the Sims: games for people who aren't that into games.
And in contrast yet another time, I hope Blizzard learned from their WarCraft III mistakes. From the comments they make, it seems like they have. I'm liking the potential for tactical interplay between T and P so far.
I think it'll be good.
im still laughing about how focking dumb you are, u think ur good old' sc bw pro right ? go back to ur pathetic 500 person ICCUP server while wc3 gets bigger and bigger in china, and the rest of the world. Battle.net actually works with wc3 with people playing the damn game (90.000 people online on an avg day on the US.East server, and like twice of that on europe/asia) instead of that horrible ICCUP server
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Nevermind, fuck off. No, War3 does not have 180 000 players on europe, war3 user stats are for ALL servers, as are the SC ones.
SC has around 90-100 000 online during korean day time, and please don't compare the War3 AMM system to ICCUP when 1) ICCUP is a private server and the War3 AMM is the official one 2) War3 has no regular melee system, so the normal way to play is to play AMM (at least I think it is), unlike in BW where melee is the standard.
I don't agree that War3 was a bomb tho, but your post is retarded.
|
On July 23 2007 00:41 FrozenArbiter wrote: Nevermind, fuck off. No, War3 does not have 180 000 players on europe, war3 user stats are for ALL servers, as are the SC ones.
SC has around 90-100 000 online during korean day time, and please don't compare the War3 AMM system to ICCUP when 1) ICCUP is a private server and the War3 AMM is the official one 2) War3 has no regular melee system, so the normal way to play is to play AMM (at least I think it is), unlike in BW where melee is the standard.
I don't agree that War3 was a bomb tho, but your post is retarded.
it's so funny when you talk about something and you don't know anything about it, right? please learn to dominate the subject your talking about or you will look like a retard. Yes sc bw is arguably a better game than wc3, but also wc3 is a hell of a game and it's a lot LOT LOT more popular than SC @ worldwide with the excepcion of korea but talking to biased old school noobs is not worth my time.
Looking to see if a guy is hopelessly biased for sc is simple:
1) He thinks the units are completely original 2) He thinks the game is flawless despite half the units/spells never being used at any level of play 3) A terrible user interface makes the game awesome 4) War3 is a failure despite being more popular in every country that isn't korea 5) Said failure is due to war3 not being starcraft on azeroth
|
|
On July 23 2007 05:44 aW]Nevermind wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 23 2007 00:41 FrozenArbiter wrote: Nevermind, fuck off. No, War3 does not have 180 000 players on europe, war3 user stats are for ALL servers, as are the SC ones.
SC has around 90-100 000 online during korean day time, and please don't compare the War3 AMM system to ICCUP when 1) ICCUP is a private server and the War3 AMM is the official one 2) War3 has no regular melee system, so the normal way to play is to play AMM (at least I think it is), unlike in BW where melee is the standard.
I don't agree that War3 was a bomb tho, but your post is retarded. it's so funny when you talk about something and you don't know anything about it, right? please learn to dominate the subject your talking about or you will look like a retard. Yes sc bw is arguably a better game than wc3, but also wc3 is a hell of a game and it's a lot LOT LOT more popular than SC @ worldwide with the excepcion of korea but talking to biased old school noobs is not worth my time. Looking to see if a guy is hopelessly biased for sc is simple: 1) He thinks the units are completely original 2) He thinks the game is flawless despite half the units/spells never being used at any level of play 3) A terrible user interface makes the game awesome 4) War3 is a failure despite being more popular in every country that isn't korea 5) Said failure is due to war3 not being starcraft on azeroth Do you know how to argue without insulting people?
|
On July 23 2007 05:44 aW]Nevermind wrote: it's so funny when you talk about something and you don't know anything about it, right? please learn to dominate the subject your talking about or you will look like a retard. Yes sc bw is arguably a better game than wc3, but also wc3 is a hell of a game and it's a lot LOT LOT more popular than SC @ worldwide with the excepcion of korea but talking to biased old school noobs is not worth my time.
Starcraft - 1998 Warcraft3 - 2002
We're a bit rusty but still in great shape for our age. See you in 4 years...or not.
|
Stegosaur
Netherlands1231 Posts
Looking to see if a guy is hopelessly biased for sc is simple:
Wow. People are biased for SC On a Starcraft site? Dedicated to professional Starcraft play?
Who would have guessed :S
|
Again, WarCraft III's popularity is not an indicator of its genre. It is a game for casual players who don't know much about other games. Yes, there are competitive players in WarCraft III. I'm not saying there aren't. It's just that, compared to the best RTS's, WarCraft III is simply... less focused. Upkeep, creeping, item stores, heroes, imbalanced races/heroes/strategies, not to mention the slow pace of combat and random damage... I always felt like luck was a far larger determinant of my games in WarCraft III. There's no luck in StarCraft. Units don't do random damage, battles are quick and decisive, and there's no (or very little) imbalance to be found. Everything in StarCraft comes from each player's decisions and nowhere else. In WarCraft III, it isn't that way. That's all I'm saying.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On July 23 2007 05:44 aW]Nevermind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2007 00:41 FrozenArbiter wrote: Nevermind, fuck off. No, War3 does not have 180 000 players on europe, war3 user stats are for ALL servers, as are the SC ones.
SC has around 90-100 000 online during korean day time, and please don't compare the War3 AMM system to ICCUP when 1) ICCUP is a private server and the War3 AMM is the official one 2) War3 has no regular melee system, so the normal way to play is to play AMM (at least I think it is), unlike in BW where melee is the standard.
I don't agree that War3 was a bomb tho, but your post is retarded. it's so funny when you talk about something and you don't know anything about it, right? please learn to dominate the subject your talking about or you will look like a retard. Yes sc bw is arguably a better game than wc3, but also wc3 is a hell of a game and it's a lot LOT LOT more popular than SC @ worldwide with the excepcion of korea but talking to biased old school noobs is not worth my time. Looking to see if a guy is hopelessly biased for sc is simple: 1) He thinks the units are completely original 2) He thinks the game is flawless despite half the units/spells never being used at any level of play 3) A terrible user interface makes the game awesome 4) War3 is a failure despite being more popular in every country that isn't korea 5) Said failure is due to war3 not being starcraft on azeroth
He's just trying to defend his game, let's get off the which game is better, we all know the real answer (neither).
|
On July 23 2007 08:28 garmule2 wrote: Again, WarCraft III's popularity is not an indicator of its genre. It is a game for casual players who don't know much about other games. Yes, there are competitive players in WarCraft III. I'm not saying there aren't. It's just that, compared to the best RTS's, WarCraft III is simply... less focused. Upkeep, creeping, item stores, heroes, imbalanced races/heroes/strategies, not to mention the slow pace of combat and random damage... I always felt like luck was a far larger determinant of my games in WarCraft III. There's no luck in StarCraft. Units don't do random damage, battles are quick and decisive, and there's no (or very little) imbalance to be found. Everything in StarCraft comes from each player's decisions and nowhere else. In WarCraft III, it isn't that way. That's all I'm saying.
thats another form of saying something but the other post was just an insult to us wc3 players, it's a very hard game to master and it's truly more of a Real time strategy game, while sc the faster wins. (not something bad tho), anyways i play both games and i enjoy both quite a lot.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 23 2007 05:44 aW]Nevermind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2007 00:41 FrozenArbiter wrote: Nevermind, fuck off. No, War3 does not have 180 000 players on europe, war3 user stats are for ALL servers, as are the SC ones.
SC has around 90-100 000 online during korean day time, and please don't compare the War3 AMM system to ICCUP when 1) ICCUP is a private server and the War3 AMM is the official one 2) War3 has no regular melee system, so the normal way to play is to play AMM (at least I think it is), unlike in BW where melee is the standard.
I don't agree that War3 was a bomb tho, but your post is retarded. it's so funny when you talk about something and you don't know anything about it, right? please learn to dominate the subject your talking about or you will look like a retard. Yes sc bw is arguably a better game than wc3, but also wc3 is a hell of a game and it's a lot LOT LOT more popular than SC @ worldwide with the excepcion of korea but talking to biased old school noobs is not worth my time. A$&*(%&$(*^% I said "I DON'T THINK WAR 3 IS A BAD GAME". Yes, outside Korea War3 is more popular - where did I say otherwise? I just said that during Korean day time there's up to 100 000 people online on battle.net playing starcraft.
Looking to see if a guy is hopelessly biased for sc is simple:
1) He thinks the units are completely original 2) He thinks the game is flawless despite half the units/spells never being used at any level of play 3) A terrible user interface makes the game awesome 4) War3 is a failure despite being more popular in every country that isn't korea 5) Said failure is due to war3 not being starcraft on azeroth
1) I don't think the units are completely original, in fact a lot of them are blatant ripoffs. 2) Half? Stop being retarded. 3) I think the unit interface is fine and anything else would make STARCRAFT worse at this point in time, that's not to say that SC2s interface has to be a copy of it. 4) War3 is not a failure I just don't like the game. 5) Lol.
On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2007 08:28 garmule2 wrote: Again, WarCraft III's popularity is not an indicator of its genre. It is a game for casual players who don't know much about other games. Yes, there are competitive players in WarCraft III. I'm not saying there aren't. It's just that, compared to the best RTS's, WarCraft III is simply... less focused. Upkeep, creeping, item stores, heroes, imbalanced races/heroes/strategies, not to mention the slow pace of combat and random damage... I always felt like luck was a far larger determinant of my games in WarCraft III. There's no luck in StarCraft. Units don't do random damage, battles are quick and decisive, and there's no (or very little) imbalance to be found. Everything in StarCraft comes from each player's decisions and nowhere else. In WarCraft III, it isn't that way. That's all I'm saying. thats another form of saying something but the other post was just an insult to us wc3 players, it's a very hard game to master and it's truly more of a Real time strategy game, while sc the faster wins. (not something bad tho), anyways i play both games and i enjoy both quite a lot. Dude, no. Just no.
Savior, the most dominant fucking player of the past 2 years, has like 200 apm -_- I'm pretty sure from what I remember of War3 replays that there's a ton of war3 players with that kind of apm.
Iloveoov - also around 200 apm, one of the most dominant of all time. Nal_rA used to be the same IIRC.
Second, how can you call a game that's not even a pure RTS, more of a real time strategy game? War3 is a RTS/RPG hybrid, and you saying it's more an RTS is just.. it makes no sense.
This is not saying it's a bad game just because it's not a pure RTS, it's an excellent RTS/RPG hybrid -.-
|
On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2007 08:28 garmule2 wrote: Again, WarCraft III's popularity is not an indicator of its genre. It is a game for casual players who don't know much about other games. Yes, there are competitive players in WarCraft III. I'm not saying there aren't. It's just that, compared to the best RTS's, WarCraft III is simply... less focused. Upkeep, creeping, item stores, heroes, imbalanced races/heroes/strategies, not to mention the slow pace of combat and random damage... I always felt like luck was a far larger determinant of my games in WarCraft III. There's no luck in StarCraft. Units don't do random damage, battles are quick and decisive, and there's no (or very little) imbalance to be found. Everything in StarCraft comes from each player's decisions and nowhere else. In WarCraft III, it isn't that way. That's all I'm saying. thats another form of saying something but the other post was just an insult to us wc3 players, it's a very hard game to master and it's truly more of a Real time strategy game, while sc the faster wins. (not something bad tho), anyways i play both games and i enjoy both quite a lot.
There's more thought involved in sc strategies than you might think. It's not just oh lets build some marines and tanks and shoot the zerg base up when I massed enough. There's very specific tactics and strategies involved. I can't remember the last time I've seen someone get flanked, use advantage of higher ground etc in wc3.
WC3 is much more engage and out micro the other player, you can hardly call it a strategy game because there is hardly any room for varying strategies.
Oh and being more popular has a lot to do with when it came out, and being much more noob friendly. Don't get me wrong I still think it's a good game for competition because of the heavy micro, I just prefer my games where you can actually think up something interesting and execute that idea instead of just micro micro micro.
|
Netherlands19124 Posts
On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2007 08:28 garmule2 wrote: Again, WarCraft III's popularity is not an indicator of its genre. It is a game for casual players who don't know much about other games. Yes, there are competitive players in WarCraft III. I'm not saying there aren't. It's just that, compared to the best RTS's, WarCraft III is simply... less focused. Upkeep, creeping, item stores, heroes, imbalanced races/heroes/strategies, not to mention the slow pace of combat and random damage... I always felt like luck was a far larger determinant of my games in WarCraft III. There's no luck in StarCraft. Units don't do random damage, battles are quick and decisive, and there's no (or very little) imbalance to be found. Everything in StarCraft comes from each player's decisions and nowhere else. In WarCraft III, it isn't that way. That's all I'm saying. thats another form of saying something but the other post was just an insult to us wc3 players, it's a very hard game to master and it's truly more of a Real time strategy game, while sc the faster wins. (not something bad tho), anyways i play both games and i enjoy both quite a lot. I so disgree with you, WC3 is so piss easy to master it's sad. And SC doesn't mean the faster wins, nada has like twice saviors APM and loses the last couple of games, sup. ;/
Any game that means losing 1 grunt in a mirror mu meaning you lose or w/e is a shit game. It's so slow its pretty easy to master and it doesn't even have a macro aspect that you can actually quality as such :/. Multitasking and unit control in SC is just in another league entirely compared to warcraft.
|
[QUOTE]On July 23 2007 10:42 Nyovne wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE] Any game that means losing 1 grunt in a mirror mu meaning you lose or w/e is a shit game. It's so slow its pretty easy to master and it doesn't even have a macro aspect that you can actually quality as such :/. Multitasking and unit control in SC is just in another league entirely compared to warcraft.[/QUOTE]
Wc3 is really hard to master because 1 focking small mistake like losing a grunt on mirror makes you lose, seems like u just lost too much and gave up.
|
[QUOTE]On July 23 2007 11:25 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 10:42 Nyovne wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE] Any game that means losing 1 grunt in a mirror mu meaning you lose or w/e is a shit game. It's so slow its pretty easy to master and it doesn't even have a macro aspect that you can actually quality as such :/. Multitasking and unit control in SC is just in another league entirely compared to warcraft.[/QUOTE]
Wc3 is really hard to master because 1 focking small mistake like losing a grunt on mirror makes you lose, seems like u just lost too much and gave up.[/QUOTE]
I used to be really hardcore into wc3 before switching to SC. This was probably my biggest complaint with the game. (well, actually random item drops were, but this is a close second).
Most games tended to follow the landslide pattern. Small losses early on soon proved insurmountable when those extra exp points your opponent got were now overpowering you. It seems there is much less room for comebacks than in SC. An early disadvantage turned into a huge disadvantage late game.
That all being said, I haven't played wc3 since 1.16, but at the time was within top 50 on east solo, so I'd like to think I'm not entirely ignorant on the subject.
|
|
Original starcraft>CNC 3
Bill roper>Justin Browder
Blizzard> EA and Westood
nuff said
|
Netherlands19124 Posts
[QUOTE]On July 23 2007 11:25 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 10:42 Nyovne wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE] Any game that means losing 1 grunt in a mirror mu meaning you lose or w/e is a shit game. It's so slow its pretty easy to master and it doesn't even have a macro aspect that you can actually quality as such :/. Multitasking and unit control in SC is just in another league entirely compared to warcraft.[/QUOTE]
Wc3 is really hard to master because 1 focking small mistake like losing a grunt on mirror makes you lose, seems like u just lost too much and gave up.[/QUOTE] Wow @ you just trying to troll. It's a bit sad and how you draw your major conclusions about people and it's not a small mistake to lose a unit cause they have a million hitpoints and the gamepace is so slow even my grandmother who's half blind can follow it (this is not a retarded example but an actual fact).
I suggest you manner up and get your stuff straight. Any game where 1 setback results in a unrecoverable situation makes for very very poor play imho. Games where people can recover due to skill and well thought out strategical choices are the points and games where you have to keep playing at your best from start to finish to win. Not score a single victory and just milk it from there.
Ah well to each his own. If you even place WC3 in the same league as SC to master or even compare it as both pure RPG's it's kinda useless to argue with it.
Kudos to FA though for trying -.-
And anyway, this is a SC2 discussion forum, not a CnC3 or WC3 or whatever I wanna cry about now forum. Drop it and troll someplace else, much obliged.
|
well EA is an evil corporation hellebent on profits instead of a clean and useful finished product
I can't comment on Bill Roper vs Justin Browder because I don't know either of them
And i've never played CnC3, although multiplayer SC is way more fun than RA/RA2
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Well, first of all, you people vastly underestimate the amount of skill needed to play WC3 well. It's room for mastery is very high, probably rivaling that of SC and the amount of tricks possible is also very high. Sure, you can't comeback with fighting on high ground, a sneak at the enemy's base or defending a choke, but there are other possibilities. Hide an expo (scouting can become really hard in War3 with slow units/unit cap) and go high upkeep, follow an unusual creeping pattern risking to get some cool XP and uber items or just creepjack the guy when he tries it. There is a demand for high speed (although too much mouse action for may tastes, particularly regarding items) and there is strategy. The only thing that truely differs is the retarded economy model which simply doesn't allow you to expand at first opportunity and the unobviousness of what is happening. When you see someone win an unphill battle by terrain abuse, it's evident and it's pure tactical thinking. When you see someone win the battle microing his spellbreakers better and having better items, it's unevident. War3 is much less spectator sport than SC, that's all, perfect play doesn't guarantee spectacularity, but it's as hard to achieve as in SC. It's not that the players are slow, the gameplay you SEE is slow, not the people behind it. And some matches are even quite exciting to watch.
The point of this post is that War3 is for one kind of players and SC is for other. I personally love the latter 10x more than the former, but that's not a valid reason to bash an excellent game. Please stop.
|
[QUOTE]On July 23 2007 11:32 Haemonculus wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 11:25 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 10:42 Nyovne wrote: [QUOTE]On July 23 2007 09:04 aW]Nevermind wrote: [QUOTE] Any game that means losing 1 grunt in a mirror mu meaning you lose or w/e is a shit game. It's so slow its pretty easy to master and it doesn't even have a macro aspect that you can actually quality as such :/. Multitasking and unit control in SC is just in another league entirely compared to warcraft.[/QUOTE]
Wc3 is really hard to master because 1 focking small mistake like losing a grunt on mirror makes you lose, seems like u just lost too much and gave up.[/QUOTE]
I used to be really hardcore into wc3 before switching to SC. This was probably my biggest complaint with the game. (well, actually random item drops were, but this is a close second).
Most games tended to follow the landslide pattern. Small losses early on soon proved insurmountable when those extra exp points your opponent got were now overpowering you. It seems there is much less room for comebacks than in SC. An early disadvantage turned into a huge disadvantage late game.
That all being said, I haven't played wc3 since 1.16, but at the time was within top 50 on east solo, so I'd like to think I'm not entirely ignorant on the subject.[/QUOTE] Agreed... I can appreciate the difficulty of WC3... It's a competitive game for sure, but it doesn't ooze with as much character and style as SC does... The pacing has a lot of problems as well, and creeping is more of a chore than any SC interface micro.
Overall WC3 is a fine game, better than 90% of the RTS's out there. However, it just lacks that spark that makes SC so dynamic and FUN to play and watch.
Btw, the best RTS to come out since Starcraft is definitely Company of Heroes... It's more of a tactical RTS, but the details, graphics, and mechanics of the game really really shine. They just need more factions and a better fanbase...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 23 2007 14:27 BluzMan wrote: Well, first of all, you people vastly underestimate the amount of skill needed to play WC3 well. It's room for mastery is very high, probably rivaling that of SC and the amount of tricks possible is also very high. Sure, you can't comeback with fighting on high ground, a sneak at the enemy's base or defending a choke, but there are other possibilities. Hide an expo (scouting can become really hard in War3 with slow units/unit cap) and go high upkeep, follow an unusual creeping pattern risking to get some cool XP and uber items or just creepjack the guy when he tries it. There is a demand for high speed (although too much mouse action for may tastes, particularly regarding items) and there is strategy. The only thing that truely differs is the retarded economy model which simply doesn't allow you to expand at first opportunity and the unobviousness of what is happening. When you see someone win an unphill battle by terrain abuse, it's evident and it's pure tactical thinking. When you see someone win the battle microing his spellbreakers better and having better items, it's unevident. War3 is much less spectator sport than SC, that's all, perfect play doesn't guarantee spectacularity, but it's as hard to achieve as in SC. It's not that the players are slow, the gameplay you SEE is slow, not the people behind it. And some matches are even quite exciting to watch.
The point of this post is that War3 is for one kind of players and SC is for other. I personally love the latter 10x more than the former, but that's not a valid reason to bash an excellent game. Please stop. Excellent post.
|
Why do people keep hyping CoH ? I can sort of see how a WWII buff can enjoy it but judging by the size of its community thats not too many people .
|
About the whole sensor dome situation, i dont think its a bad idea at all. In SC1, all the races have a defensive structure that detects. It seems to me that Blizzard wants to differentiate the races even further, by possibly removing detection from the missile turret. This job will go to the sensor dome, so when tank pushing you will need to build both turrets and sensor domes to prevent both air attacks and cloaked attacks. With the missile turret not detecting (and with the comsat potentially gone) this could make cloaked units like DTs a lot more useful, and make more strategies viable.
And as for the radar dome, we dont really know how it works, but i suspect it wont have too large a range (maybe twice the range of a turret or so). That will prevent it being overpowered, but will still let it be useful, giving you some advance warning of an enemy attack. It may also help to allow the siege tank to attack at full range without needing a spotter unit for it (iirc the siege tank had a large attack range than sight range in SC). So lets wait and see how it works before making judgements.
As for the other terran units, i have to say i like them all. I'm a bit unsure about the banshee's looks though - i just cant see it flying through space looking as cool as wraiths used to do in SC cinematics.
A few more thoughts: i was thinking that with the banshee's and BC's aoe anti-ground attacks/abilities, it might be quite hard to counter terran air with ground units, especially for zerg (unless they get some sweet new units, which is likely i guess). I was also wondering which terran ground units will take the role of the goliath as anti-air. The thor doesnt attack air, and the viking seems to only attack air when in flight mode, so that leaves the cobra. Is the cobra resiliant enough to deal with large numbers of air units? And will its attack be damaging enough to deal with air units that marines aren't effective against? I guess we'll just have to wait for more details about terran units...
By the way, i really like the idea of the new add-on buildings. It would be great to switch around the add-ons when you want to change your build.
And i'm really hoping that the planetary fortress can fly and attack at the same time. That would be so damn cool!
|
|
|
|