EPTOn October 29 2009 11:50 Prod wrote:
-All the units seem to fire lasers, looks bad
-All the units seem to fire lasers, looks bad
I dont think there is a single unit (besides ghost targeting nuke) that actually fires lasers.
New Battle Report (10/19/2009) - Page 23
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
I dont think there is a single unit (besides ghost targeting nuke) that actually fires lasers. | ||
|
Kimera757
Canada129 Posts
On November 15 2009 20:14 spkim1 wrote: On second thoughts, this BR could have been better... Along with all the other BRs. 1. Why does Blizzard make BR releases so secretive? Reference to BR#2,3, and 4. I see absolutely no point in that. For god's sake, it's just a video of you guys filming each other play. Post them en masse! Battle reports are advertising for new and lower-skilled players. Blizzard would only release a BR that's more fun for them, not something that's boring to anyone who isn't a progamer. 2. Who wants to see accross the map before every battle? It's so annoying! We don't want explanations of the map, we can see every significant locations through the minimap, especially if it's an already existing, famous map like LT (which was imba in this case due to those badly placed hills next to the natural expo). We get what a Xel'Naga watch tower is, and how pointless its existence is too. I do. Or at least some of it. The darkness is kind of annoying; it's observer mode, so can't they just wipe the fog of war for us at the beginning? Again, the BRs are designed for lower-skilled players, and often for people who have never even played an RTS before. For a new map like the second one at the 2 v 2 tournament, showing us the lanes was helpful. And even for Lost Temple, as you noticed yourself, you could easily see the changes (and give a more valid complaint about them). I'm sure even someone of your experience couldn't tell where the golden minerals were right at the beginning; I suspect that's because there were no golden minerals in the StarCraft I version of the map. And of course, new players might never have seen the old Lost Temple. On the other hand, the watch towers... we all know about them by now. I guess Blizzard figures there's a bunch of people who watched BR 4 who had never watched an earlier one. If you slow down and think about the complaints, you'll realize quite a few aren't really valid, at least not for the intended audience. 3. Improve the spectator camera view. Don't you guys at Blizzard ever watch Proleagues of the game you've made 11 years ago? My point is, please stop showing insignificant parts of the map, like those Xel'Naga watchtowers or whatever, and show places like the main base, natural expo, and expansions much more frequently. We want to see the macro decisions of each player. See the first point again. BRs are advertising for new and lower-skilled players. They generally don't care much about macro and don't want to watch probes being made or Proton Charge being spammed. 4. It's nice that we can see what each player is building, as well as their resource states, but shouldn't that make you guys want to play even better? I mean, David had over 1400 minerals at some point, he had a Starport which only built a dropship, bleah medivac sorry old habits, and then somehow was put to sleep never to be touched again, and there were something like four factories instead of 10. And where are the armories? with that much mineral in my hands I would build 3 armories for massive upgrades. You want the unstoppable guy to play even better? I'd rather see two moderately-skilled players duking it out, than one high-skilled player pwning a moderately-skilled player, thanks. On November 15 2009 22:50 Archerofaiur wrote: I dont think there is a single unit (besides ghost targeting nuke) that actually fires lasers. Battlecruisers fired lasers in the StarCraft I manual, so... | ||
|
Captain Peabody
United States3099 Posts
All the units seem to fire lasers, looks bad Okay, I have heard this little meme one time too many, and I really have to protest. What's wrong with lasers? I mean, are you telling me that this + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/2/2b/Apollo's_temple_under_attack.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/0/0b/Obrien_defends_with_phaser.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/f/ff/Turbolaser-dt1.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://crotchetyoldfan.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/flash_gordon1940.jpg) Have we really become "too cool" for awesomeness? I think not. Lasers are good, just as giant glowy crystals are good and glowing blue energy swords are good. These things are what made Thank you for your time... | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On November 15 2009 23:12 Kimera757 wrote: Battlecruisers fired lasers in the StarCraft I manual, so... In SC2 they are plasma turrets. On November 15 2009 23:18 Captain Peabody wrote: Okay, I have heard this little meme one time too many, and I really have to protest. What's wrong with lasers? I mean, are you telling me that this + Show Spoiler + No but this is ![[image loading]](http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/2761/397997-spartan_laser_blast_super.jpg) | ||
|
Kimera757
Canada129 Posts
On November 15 2009 23:12 Kimera757 wrote: Battlecruisers fired lasers in the StarCraft I manual, so... Archerofaiur: In SC2 they are plasma turrets. Are you sure that's not the old Plasma Turret ability you're thinking of? Why do people think lasers are uncool? Here you go. I don't think they look uncool, but art appreciation is a matter of opinion. They often look weak though. Few settings make energy beams look dangerous; Star Trek gave phasers to the pacifistic Federation; Babylon 5 was one setting that made them look powerful though  (When you see particle beams literally carving a ship up, it's hard to call them weak.)Also, gunfire just seems to have that visceral earth-shattering boom-and-shake, which is why I'd like to see the thor fire actual bullets for its regular ground attack. | ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
Though they should add some new firing techniques. As an example, the reaver's scarabs were quite unique and cool. The same can be said about the lurker's spines. SC2 is seriously lacking this? | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On November 18 2009 00:22 ParasitJonte wrote: Making beams/lasers is easy and it looks rather decent. Perhaps that's why? Though they should add some new firing techniques. As an example, the reaver's scarabs were quite unique and cool. The same can be said about the lurker's spines. SC2 is seriously lacking this? Good point. The broodlord attack is pretty new. As is the corrupters corrupted mass. I would like to see the zerg have more tiny bug attacks. Oh and I really hope they show the the lurker actually shoots spines through the ground cause I have no idea. Lets see the sunken crawlers attack is pretty cool. As is the nullifers. However the terran is all missles and shells. Can anyone think up any new graphical attack changes? | ||
|
ERGO
United States168 Posts
On November 18 2009 00:22 ParasitJonte wrote: Making beams/lasers is easy and it looks rather decent. Perhaps that's why? Though they should add some new firing techniques. As an example, the reaver's scarabs were quite unique and cool. The same can be said about the lurker's spines. SC2 is seriously lacking this? lurkers are still in the game, and they as of yet do not shoot lasers. Lots of stuff doesn't fire lasers you guys. Most of the Terran units and all of the Zerg units are 100% laser free. | ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On November 18 2009 02:44 ERGO wrote: lurkers are still in the game, and they as of yet do not shoot lasers. Lots of stuff doesn't fire lasers you guys. Most of the Terran units and all of the Zerg units are 100% laser free. I dont think you understand his post. He isnt saying lurkers are gone. He is saying lurkers have a unique attack just as reavers have a unique attack. I think he is wanting sc2 to have more cool/interesting/unique attacks. | ||
|
KnightOfNi
United States1508 Posts
Awesome game though . | ||
|
zazen
Brazil695 Posts
- High Templars should leave a trail while moving like they did in SC1, instead of just flying around. - Hellions and Thors not only look bad, they are also boring units with no special abilities. - Nuke cooldown seemed pretty much ridiculous, but we all know balance don't mean a lot at this point as everything changes constantly. - And the most important issue: Thinking of SC1 PvT army vs army battle, SC2 PvT seems mind-numbling easy. When armies clashed, players simply 1a2a3a their way into victory. No mine placement, no sieging/unsieging, repairing and building turrets. No arbiter cloak and stasis control, shuttle bombs or mine dragging. Even positioning seemed only slightly relevant - whoever had the biggest army wins and that's it. Out of all the things I listed, this is the one that can be a real issue in the future. David Kim, the winner, never bothered to dodge a single storm. The P player also didn't bother controlling his units in army battles. The blinks and harasses are defnitely very nice, but when it comes down to late game, it boils down to attack move into your opponents expansions and pray. SC2 needs to be HEAVILY micro-oriented now that we have MBS and auto-mining peons. That didn't seem to be the case in this BR. BR3 was the best, by far - mostly because PvZ seemed twice as interesting as this PvT did. | ||
|
horang3
United States261 Posts
On November 18 2009 07:28 zazen wrote: I re-watched BR4 and the same things bothered me again... - High Templars should leave a trail while moving like they did in SC1, instead of just flying around. lol the animations aren't finished yet, so that shouldn't be a problem. | ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
- Hellions and Thors not only look bad, they are also boring units with no special abilities. Thors have a special ability iirc, but it seems that every unit in starcraft2 has some sort of ability even if its just a gimmick (corruptors) I think there should be less if anything. What the thor needs to become less boring is a weakness, at the moment they are too mobile and multi-functional. | ||
| ||
