EPTOn January 14 2014 01:59 awwnuts07 wrote:
-old BW players who AREN'T elitist
-old BW players who AREN'T elitist
facepalm...
The rest was fine though^^
[A] Starbow - Page 506
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
facepalm... The rest was fine though^^ | ||
|
awwnuts07
United States621 Posts
On January 14 2014 02:07 The_Red_Viper wrote: facepalm... The rest was fine though^^ LOL. It was meant as a joke. I have just run into too many BW fanboys (in real life) that I can't help writing that shit out. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
My biggest concern right now is that it is overhyped as fuck and therefore you will get a lot of people who will complain about anything, just as in sc2. It will be extremely difficult now to filter constructive critisism from whine, meaning balancing will be quite challenging^^ | ||
|
awwnuts07
United States621 Posts
On January 14 2014 02:11 The_Red_Viper wrote: If you say so..^^ My biggest concern right now is that it is overhyped as fuck and therefore you will get a lot of people who will complain about anything, just as in sc2. It will be extremely difficult now to filter constructive critisism from whine, meaning balancing will be quite challenging^^ That's definitely a real concern. Thankfully, I'm not balancing the mod, so I don't have to separate the wheat from the chaff. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On January 14 2014 01:59 awwnuts07 wrote: Ho lee fuk. You need to put a TLDR on this essay. :D I'm pretty sure people aren't expecting this game to replace SC2. If they are, I think their expectations are unrealistic. From what I've seen, the community rising around this mod consist of: -old BW players who AREN'T elitist -SC2 players looking for a new experience Both these groups accept the mod for what it is: a labor of love. They know it's an amateur product and they're fine with that because the mod is fun to play. I think the people you're talking about are those that are really concerned with Starcraft being the greatest e-sport of all time, but at the same time, hardly play the game they champion. Yeah, those people will eventually peace out because this isn't the savior of Starcraft. Personally, I'm more concerned with having enough people to play with. So far, it's looking like a nice core is forming. Well, there's lots of unrealistic people on reddit. I'm just worried that a nice initiative like Starbow might get terrible reception and cause rifts in the community because of unrealistic expectations, therefore I thought it prudent for the Starbow developers to mention that it's not an SC2 replacement over and over and over. And sorry, I was writing stream-of-consciousness mode basically. I was stuck with just a tablet all weekend and had various things I wanted to write but couldn't, so it all came out now.  | ||
|
awwnuts07
United States621 Posts
On January 14 2014 02:32 Grumbels wrote: Well, there's lots of unrealistic people on reddit. Actually, I forgot you were referencing reddit. Yeah, plenty of people there who are not that in touch with reality. | ||
|
Clbull
United Kingdom1439 Posts
| ||
|
TopRamen
United States96 Posts
Sorry I wasn't able to elaborate. First, to make sure we are on the same page i'll tell you what I think you're trying to say... It sounds like you are talking about the viability of Terran builds and you're arguing how Terran can better adapt to what Zerg is doing with a buffed scan. What I wanted to say was that I didn't find scan/scouting holding me back vs Zerg. The build I posted was the one I used vs Zerg like 8 games (both vs friends and random ppl in the SBow channel) those few days ago. I didn't have a problem using this build to adapt to Zerg strategy, when the double OC's finish I can double scan the Zerg at his nat and his main to find out what tech/drones/units he's got or going for. I don't think that the problem is that Terran can't scout well enough, and Terran can even adapt to w/e Zerg is doing. Its that Terran can't adapt well enough to fight off other builds, namely the mass Roach build I've encountered. If Zerg doesn't play with Roaches, which I've also tested, the game plays out SO similar to BW. Also, Scan energy cost is 35. Not sure how much energy OC's start with but it is enough to get a scan or overcharge off. Maybe my build is flawed, maybe I don't correctly use my build, I don't know, but from I've seen/done Terran doesn't have good enough counterplay options. If anyone has found a more effective solution to counter mass Roach, let me know! Also, need to edit post, but clarification on the build: You put down 2 more Rax not at 30, more like 35-40 ish. And you put a 2nd TLab down after you put down Fac, so you have some more production flexibility. More marines or medics. Anyways... Now when I play TvZ I go mech (2 fac vults with speed/minds) and try to keep Zerg shutdown, keep him from macroing Roaches super hard. That is what I wanted to say about scan viability, again sorry I didn't elaborate on my first post. Also, i'm glad SBow has been seeing more activity lately, its awesome to see this mod being played  | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Second If Zerg doesn't play with Roaches, which I've also tested, the game plays out SO similar to BW. Banelings? | ||
|
TopRamen
United States96 Posts
On January 14 2014 03:26 Foxxan wrote: What iam talking about is the upgrade on ebay which gives the scan seperate energy. Literally he gets charges, but its the same thing. Second Banelings? Ah... I didn't know there was a EBay upgrade that gives separate energy for scans. On the note of banes, I don't have much. I've played against 2 ling/bane builds, one was a bust build, and the other was a macro build. I don't mind banes as a macro strat as I feel it can be countered effectively (but I don't know, haven't played against it enough), Roaches with burrow charge screw up so many Terran armies. They get max DPS in just a matter of seconds and there's almost nothing you can do about it. | ||
|
frostydanger
1 Post
Until today. I am playing starbow nearly all day now, and it's more fun than I ever had in starcraft. I'll admit i am a bit rusty, and getting destroyed by other people but I'm still playing and getting better. Today was the first time I ever heard of starbow. Props to the modders, you have done an amazing job. I hope this develops more and a ranking system of some sorts is implemented. And again great work! Really loving playing starcraft again right now. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
NapkinBox
United States314 Posts
On January 14 2014 04:06 Laertes wrote: One thing I've noticed is that Starbow seems to be bringing a lot of people back to SC2. This references an interesting phenomena I have observed about the UMS scene and that is people have games that are essentially the reason they play SC2. They do not play SC2 for any other reason, just for one or two games they love dearly. That's interesting, since most people play SC2 for the ladder only. Just thinking out loud here, but I wonder what this entails. Pretty sure same thing goes with every other game with mods. | ||
|
p1cKLes
United States342 Posts
Personally, I think it’s one of the very reasons BW is still being played to this day. There was an amazing synergy of units, macro and most importantly micro (visible or not). Micro is what gave the game depth and depth is what keeps gamers coming back. RTS has never been a game designed for casual gamers, it’s a thinking man’s game. While I do agree there should be tools allowing casual and new gamers to easily pick up and understand the game, it should never be designed with the casual gamer as the sole reason not to implement something. Viewers watch SC2 to see things that can’t be done by the average gamer. Some of the most exciting games I’ve ever seen was TvZ because of all the micro that was happening. Whether it was visually apparent micro or not, no viewer missed the results of (as an example) marine king (or any other gamer) micro’ing his way out of a situation leaving the gamer and viewer wondering how the hell he did that. It’s why I really would love to see some of the micro pointed out in Lalushs video implemented. It does not matter whether it is visually apparent or not, the results (hands down) are always apparent, which puts the gamer on the edge of his seat wondering how? | ||
|
JohnnyZerg
Italy378 Posts
| ||
|
GamanNo
Sweden63 Posts
Feel free to check it out if you want to see what units, buildings etc. are in the mod. And please report if you find something that is wrong | ||
|
djWHEAT
United States925 Posts
| ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
| ||
|
murphs
Ireland418 Posts
Personally I was drifting away from SC2 since the release of hots. While hots is better than wings, it wasn't enough of an improvement. It's very difficult to remain interested in a game when all that holds you is some glimmer of hope that Blizzard will see the light and make the big changes that need to happen. David Kim's balance post last week was the last straw. In a game with such deeply rooted design issues this guy hops on to the forums to let everyone know that winrates are near the 50% mark and therefore his job is done until a month later where he will do the exact same thing. Hopeless. As if by divine intervention I discover Starbow this weekend past. I am playing it and enjoying it immensely. I don't care about the balance issues that may exist. Balance is a luxury we can afford to discuss when the fundamentals are solid and the game is fun. Starbow is FUN. SC2 is dead to me now. I'm not waiting for Blizzard to fix the game because it won't happen. I'll be playing this instead. | ||
|
Ahli
Germany355 Posts
Bug: - High Ground mechanic doesn't work properly in every case. If you switch targets between starts attacking and the actual weapon launch, the damage reduction effect applies to another target you attack. This just resulted in a Dragoon dealing 0.5 damage on a Marine standing right next to it. FIX: remove the behavior, if the trigger doesn't add the high_ground behavior (so, remove the behavior in the else case) - The High Ground mechanic doesn't work properly when a fast attacker switches the target. For example, a Marine shoots at something on a cliff and received the debuff. It deals 0.5 damage to the unit on the cliff. After dealing damage it is ordered to attack a unit directly next to it. The Marine attacks and deals 0.5 damage, too. The problem is the duration. It has a static duration of 1.5. It should be tied to the unit type instead to avoid overly long durations. - The "Attack" button used by some units creates a problem when the "simple command card" game option is used by the player. For example, Arbiter shows the first row of commands. Btw, it doesn't show its abilities, so you should check the other button's settings, too. The button's field for that is named "Hides for simple text". Possible Optimizations: - Make use of the "default" case in switches (it's its own field) to save the last validator check. Also, that would be used automatically for all units that don't pass your other validators making it a more robust implementation. Else you might have attacks that don't deal damage to some units, if your validators and unit attributes aren't calibrated correctly. - "Set to 1" trigger has a redundant "wait" action making the thread exist longer than necessary. There is a limit of 1024 threads. - "Map Init" overrides the current order indicator setting for players 1 to 15. Player 15 is forced to be the player "Hostile". So, you either use 0 to 14 or 1 to 14, if you plan to never alter Player 0 (neutral) in a map (which you really shouldn't). => 1 to 14 - "Map Init" sets a custom value to 0. That's the initial value, so the whole loop is not required. - Why is there a wait(0.0625) [= 1 game loop] at the end of the "siegedAttackAbility"? Why can't you just remove it? The only application of the custom value mattering for siege tanks is the same trigger... I don't fully understand your siegedAttackAbility. Do you care to elaborate why it is required? | ||
| ||
