EPTMineral/Gas Conversion - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Spyfire242
United States715 Posts
| ||
|
Straylight
Canada706 Posts
But this late in the development I think it would be a pretty difficult change to implement. And for people complaining about lore, what the shit? The whole thing is sci-fi there is so much stuff in SC that doesn't make sense. Hell you can condense water vapour into ice, add a lil sci-fi magic and you can condense gas into crystals. | ||
|
AMaidensWrath
Belgium206 Posts
this would probably make things too hard for say Zerg when it comes to denying a Protoss third. If they can take a mineral only and convert the mineral surplus to gas then their late-mid game is unhindered by the zerg attempts to deny that third gas. ... wouldn't be a problem. | ||
|
inReacH
Sweden1612 Posts
On December 21 2009 04:05 Sentient66 wrote: No. This idea is really dumb, because it's a crutch for players who have bad macro. "Oh snap, I have 1000 minerals after harassing with mutas? No problem, just convert some into gas, and make more units!" Finally someone said it. This would ruin the game as it takes away one of the most important and interesting decisions in the game away; when to take your gas(es). (I'm very very excited that this decision has to be made 4-6 times in the early-midgame now, rather than only 2-3 times. | ||
|
EmeraldSparks
United States1451 Posts
Mineral macro mechanic costs gas EZ (too bad none of the races macro mechanics works in a way such that this functions) | ||
|
ix
United Kingdom184 Posts
| ||
|
dhe95
United States1213 Posts
| ||
|
Traveler
United States451 Posts
| ||
|
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
| ||
|
Rainmaker5
United States1027 Posts
On December 21 2009 09:42 EmeraldSparks wrote: Gas macro mechanic costs minerals Mineral macro mechanic costs gas EZ (too bad none of the races macro mechanics works in a way such that this functions) This would be pretty sexy for something like the protoss model where you need saturation anyway. So it's not like- BAM! gas/minerals but more like- 6 probes on gas pay 200 minerals faster gas mining etc. | ||
|
No.Doubt
Canada202 Posts
It takes the whole point of having gas expansions that are harder to defend then mineral only expansions when they provide the exact same resource. | ||
|
Chen
United States6344 Posts
On December 21 2009 12:06 dhe95 wrote: Realistically speaking, (yes, no matter what you believe, a game still has to have some sense of realism) how would you possibly convert rocks into oil? you melt it? >.> just like you can turn shale rocks into an oil usable as petroleum. What would be interesting is to see what happens in ultra-late game low-econ situations where players have like 5K gas and 0 mins. unless the ratio is heavily skewed both ways, ie 5 mins=1 gas 5 gas=1min, It would not be physically possible to starve out your opponent anymore. | ||
|
fabiano
Brazil4644 Posts
i dont like the idea. sounds way too age of empires... | ||
|
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
On December 21 2009 16:26 Chen wrote: you melt it? >.> just like you can turn shale rocks into an oil usable as petroleum. What would be interesting is to see what happens in ultra-late game low-econ situations where players have like 5K gas and 0 mins. unless the ratio is heavily skewed both ways, ie 5 mins=1 gas 5 gas=1min, It would not be physically possible to starve out your opponent anymore. Why wouldn't it? Theres still a finite amount of minerals and gas on the field. And once it's gone it's gone. Even a 1:1 conversion ratio would still result in starvation when everythings depleted. Btw I don't think I like this idea. It does open up more build order variations, but the two seperate minerals are a defining part of the resource system. If you end up with a heap of gas at the end of a game BL, you chose a more mineral heavy build and didn't account for it in very late game. If you end up witha heap of extra minerals, gg buy some mineral only units and see what you can do. I would rather see a 3rd physical resource added than the first two being interchangable. Even if it is to a bad return ratio. And if they did allow resource conversion... No it should not be in the form of a neutral building. How would that even make sense? And even if you could justify it with lore, it's bording on a WC3 mechanic. + Show Spoiler + Not saying WC3 is bad, just that Blizzard has done a good job differentiating the two RTSs, and I don't like the idea of bringing them closer together with neutral trading posts. | ||
|
Badjas
Netherlands2038 Posts
Using this mechanic could enable certain rushing strategies for gas heavy tech or units. Of course as with any early to mid game build, tweaking of balance is important for the build to be viable and a reasonable alternative to other builds. There are many balance factors (read: options) in this setup plus the visual cue for the scouting dynamic. Now I am talking Terran only here as it fits nicely with lore (and I am actually thinking of the trade building from dune 2). I don't think it is necessary for all races to be equal in such an ability. Also, separate from the implementation of any resource conversion mechanism, it is silly to outright claim that the general idea has no place in starcraft 2. | ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
Overall, I don't think this is a good idea for SC II. However, what could be fun to see, is resource trading between teammates in team-games. Not sure how that would work out either, but at least it would make perfect sense and hopefully make up for a lot more variation in games with 4 or more players. | ||
|
AMaidensWrath
Belgium206 Posts
And if they did allow resource conversion... No it should not be in the form of a neutral building. How would that even make sense? And even if you could justify it with lore, it's bording on a WC3 mechanic. Why would that make no sense? A trade-post/marketplace with natives buying and selling stuff, doesn't sound that absurd to me.I also don't understand why it would be a problem that it reminds you of the WCIII mechanic. Wouldn't be the first time that SC and WC lend ideas from each other. Besides, there wasn't anything like a market/conversion place in WCIII, or am I wrong? | ||
|
onmach
United States1241 Posts
| ||
|
TeWy
France714 Posts
If you can transform X -> Y (X into Y), it implies that X=Y. In some other RTS games like AoM you can trade a ressource for another one, but that's completly different, that is historically and economically accurate. | ||
|
ForTenPoints
United States140 Posts
Liquid water can be transformed into water vapor and water vapor can be transformed into liquid water but liquid water does NOT equal water vapor. There are other elements involved in the transformation. | ||
| ||
