EPTIt's the first C&C which actually looks fun to play multiplayer competitively in. That's already saying something.
Grey Goo - new RTS from original C&C devs - Page 23
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
It's the first C&C which actually looks fun to play multiplayer competitively in. That's already saying something. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On January 27 2015 22:33 Mannerheim wrote: I wouldn't call it free considering you have to defend the extractor, and the vulnerable workers have to travel the full distance there and back to bring in any money. Humans can get stealthed workers, but that's to work around the racial handicap and not risk-free either. You probably meant it is not cost free as in GG you can only research one of three tech within a group. So to get safer workers you need to sacrifice something else important. I think these tech options are a cool innovation and will play a big role once players become better and those that cast tournaments understand the game well enough. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On January 27 2015 22:42 LegalLord wrote: I don't think it's fair to compare a game that is 3 days old to a game that is still a work in progress more than 4 years later, nor to another game which took 3 years after the expansion was released to finish balancing. It's the first C&C which actually looks fun to play multiplayer competitively in. That's already saying something. It is also pretty balanced at release which was pretty surprising to me. But maybe I am just making the same mistake as people bashing the game by claiming that as it is too early to know until people become much better at playing it. | ||
|
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On January 27 2015 22:16 -Archangel- wrote: I don't agree with you. You pay for refinery itself. You also pay for distant farming by needing to wait for first workers to come back and start giving you resources. It is also much easier to intercept and kill workers with distant mining. There is cost and risk with it. Also a lot of this text should like not you didn't care to do more effort because you didn't need to vs AI. If it is so simple and stupid, I am sure you will be at top of ladder with X:0 record in no time. And you complain about not having someone to detect invisible as a fault of the game. Really? And if there are truly fundamental problems with the game, these devs are ready to fix them. They are not Blizzard. Yeah, my bad, the building you get in your base (well-defended and infinitely reusable) is called refinery and costs 800. The one that is built over a resource vent is instead called an extractor and is 100% free. There's 0 reason not to build one if you have available refineries. That is vastly different from any other sane RTS because the part that is exposed costs nothing, therefore it's a no-brainer to rebuild it. You lose mining time if you lose the extractor, sure, but there's no room for a decision like "should I invest 400 minerals into a CC and 1000 more in workers that I can irreversibly lose or should I instead invest into 28 more marines". There's the "lost profits" thing, but there isn't a "lost investment" and it's a huge difference that reduces the impact of decisions and spectator value. Once you spend that 800 energy on a refinery it's always there, you can't realistically lose it unless you also lose the main base and the game and the worst that can happen is that it won't work for a short while until you find another spot for it since there are too many of them on the map to realistically control. That mechanic is bad. Won't even comment on your reply about invisibility since my original posting was so obviously not about that. Maybe you're right about the devs who are ready to fix problems, I dunno, I didn't yet try contact them. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On January 27 2015 23:16 BluzMan wrote: The building you get in your base (well-defended) is called refinery and costs 800. The one that is built over a resource vent is called an extractor (my bad) and is 100% free. There's 0 reason not to build one if you have available refineries. So? In your previous example AI kept losing that extractor. That was the cost. Vs other players they will not be stubborn enough to keep placing it there. It is completely pointless to debate design and balance based on games vs AI. Play 100 games vs other players and come back than. I am not going around this topic and screaming OMG, this game is so much better than SC2! or Best game ever! I am also not bashing it openly. It is impossible to know how good or bad it is until there are enough games played | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
Anywho, I can't attest to the multiplayer since I haven't dived into that yet, but the single player campaign so far is fantastic. An interesting story, some of the highest quality cinematics and voice acting I've seen in a video game, and it's pretty difficult after only a few missions on Hard. That may just be me butting heads with a different system than I am used to, but I appreciate the difficulty. Hopefully the game doesn't suffer from a community problem and stays alive for a long time. It doesn't need to be an eSport, and from what I've seen it isn't really the right game for it, but I think it's a good thing for the genre. My biggest beef with the game, and this should speak volumes, is that the name is stupid. I found out about it on TL with a bit of context, but if someone had said to me "Have you heard about Grey Goo?" a high-quality polished RTS from the original C&C devs would not have been anywhere in my top 100 guesses for what that game would be. | ||
|
SeinGalton
South Africa387 Posts
| ||
|
Kruxxen
United States149 Posts
The game has good developer support, and I think with a few small changes it will be a great RTS. First off, for mechanics changes I think the autobuild button should be removed for competitive, and I think you should have to build the workers for your harvesters manually, to increase the apm needed to play. Then it needs an expansion pack which includes 1. A Beta dropship (beta are currently the only race that can't bypass terrain, and a dropship would fit in with their style) 2. some kind of spellcaster or ability based units for the races Honestly with these changes I think the game will be huge. Masters terran player btw. | ||
|
Ysellian
Netherlands9029 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11929 Posts
On January 28 2015 03:31 Soldier92 wrote: First off, for mechanics changes I think the autobuild button should be removed for competitive, and I think you should have to build the workers for your harvesters manually, to increase the apm needed to play. These are bad ideas. It's the classic "Ok this isn't BW thus it needs to be changed" symptom. Adding actions just to increase the amount of APM necessary is a really bad design decision. If you go down that route, you might as well add some random minigames like "Every time you want to build a unit solve a captcha. Totally increases APM, totally stupid idea." In my opinion, an interface should be designed as elegantly as possible and make convincing the game to do what you want it to do as simple as possible. Adding in random hurdles just because is silly. If you think the game should require more APM, increase the speed or have bigger maps or something along those lines. Don't add random APM for APM's sake mechanics into the game, those are silly and this argument is pretty much only brought because BW had some such mechanics due to technical limitations at the time it was written. | ||
Falling
Canada11586 Posts
It's cool how on the macro scale they are aiming for asymmetry. Even if the game doesn't turn out, the Grey Goo faction is an interesting innovation. As a casual observer, I would level this one criticism of the game- within faction, the unit design is very samey. I don't mean by function (I wouldn't know) but I mean visually. The Humans have 4-5 units that look like Roman helmets and the Betas have at least three walker units with shoulder mounted cannons. I suspect that's supposed to be for faction cohesion, but it makes it difficult to parse an army composition as an observer. I would level the same criticism at SupCom games- all their regular units (not including Experimentals or shield generator units.) This is something I feel older RTS' did better and I don't just mean Blizzard games. C&C the original, even despite the poor graphics, you could easily enough tell the difference between minigunners, grenadiers, and rocket soldiers and APCs vs Medium Tanks and Humvees. And when someone had Mammoth Tanks, you knew they had Mammoth Tanks. Whereas, even if I look at the wiki, the visual differences between the Hailstorm and the Avalanche are confoundingly few. After watching the stream, I'm sure it's a fun game, but not a game for me. The sluggish unit movement both in terms of top speed and turn around time may be what some people are looking for, but it just feels limiting to me and makes me impatient. I want to be able to move my units fast. I want them to respond to my commands quickly and precisely. So this isn't the game for me, though it may be exactly what someone else is looking for. But I hope them all the best because I want to see more RTS's succeed so more companies try their hand at it. | ||
|
ionONE
Germany605 Posts
The Mother Goo can increase their mining efficiency by patrolling/moving between resource pools! http://www.reddit.com/r/greygoo/comments/2t4fbc/psa_your_mother_goos_like_moving/ Strategy Human/Beta vs goo: Place silo/walls on top of resource pools to delay Goo http://www.reddit.com/r/greygoo/comments/2tuhpv/nasty_walls_as_beta/ early Beta harras strat vs Beta/Human: - double factory into tower rushing refinery, provides mapcontrol following by expansion reactive Beta vs Beta opening by using the pause building button: http://www.reddit.com/r/greygoo/comments/2ttv5c/grey_goo_tutorial_series_beta_vs_beta_your_input/ | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On January 28 2015 06:53 Garmer wrote: can someone point me the huk stream plz? He is not streaming atm but Vibe is: http://www.twitch.tv/vibelol I need note that Vibe is a total newb to GG so don't expect much. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
On January 28 2015 03:31 Soldier92 wrote: First off, for mechanics changes I think the autobuild button should be removed for competitive, and I think you should have to build the workers for your harvesters manually, to increase the apm needed to play. Why? | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10794 Posts
On January 28 2015 07:29 Grumbels wrote: It's kind of funny how it works. SC2 had so much hype at release but in GG you're apparently(?) struggling to even find players willing to do multiplayer and it's unsure whether it can foster a competitive scene, but all of this in part is independent of the quality of the game. I think people find it difficult to be competitive at something if it's not framed as a competitive activity, so it's like a bootstrap type situation. I haven't played yet so I can't comment on this situation, but I really hope the multiplayer isn't dead when I log on to NA server, that would be a waste of 50$ LOL | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On January 28 2015 07:29 Grumbels wrote: It's kind of funny how it works. SC2 had so much hype at release but in GG you're apparently(?) struggling to even find players willing to do multiplayer and it's unsure whether it can foster a competitive scene, but all of this in part is independent of the quality of the game. I think people find it difficult to be competitive at something if it's not framed as a competitive activity, so it's like a bootstrap type situation. GG is slowly growing and will grow more rapidly once Steam sales for GG start. Also Blizzard spent way more money for marketing and financed tournaments. It also had BW and BW players as background. GG needs to grow from zero like BW did. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
If anything, it might be more reasonable to have the game run at 1.5x speed to make it less slow. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
| ||
