|
By WMD's, I mean reavers, stronger templar storm, spider mine, lurkers, scourge, stronger siege tank fire, corsairs, etc.
The general direction that sc2 has taken from what I can tell is that they removed these unites that create "oh shit" moments. For example, if max out fully upgraded Terran and Protoss army in sc1 collide, there is so much random factors. You can't really predict how the spider mines will react, or whether or not the templars are going to be killed by splash from tank fire/mines. In TvZ, lurkers can create that oh shit moment where your bionics get trampled, or swarm gets spread on Terran base, or your entire vessel cloud gets plagued. I won't even go into the effects of storm and reavers in PvZ.
These units are so powerful in that they can literally change the momentum of the game in mere seconds. 2 stop lurkers can change the game more drastically than the mothership can. Of course you can argue that these units made SC1, but at the same time, it also took away from the strategy part of real time strategy.
SC2 feels like it is more dependent on macro and overarching strategy rather than in micro managing your units. You won't have a so-called "hero reavers" in sc2. Outcomes of battles will be more reliant on army composition and positioning. Whether this is for better or for worse is too early to tell, but it is how thing are at the moment.
So, the next time you suggest that they bring back a WMD from SC1, think about how it would fit into Blizz's design philosophy for SC2. Like it or not, it is the direction they have chosen for the sequel, and it will probably stay this way.... at least until the expansions.
|
the raven seeking bombs seem pretty "random" to me :p
i also think the nukes will be like that too
|
On February 27 2010 09:19 MorroW wrote: the raven seeking bombs seem pretty "random" to me :p
i also think the nukes will be like that too
both terran....hmmmm
|
good point. we wanna play starcraft not warcraft with starcraft units
|
On February 27 2010 11:21 Roulette36 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 09:19 MorroW wrote: the raven seeking bombs seem pretty "random" to me :p
i also think the nukes will be like that too both terran....hmmmm
Zerg have infestor with fungal growth and parasite, which sound pretty fun, but I haven't seen them used yet. Protoss have storm still, it might get stronger; I"m not sure why it's so weak right now, and vortexes, I guess?
There are a lot of other strategic abilities that will be interesting to watch, like sentry force field.
|
I think the colossus comes pretty close. I saw this one game (pvp) where the guy sends the first colossus he made calmly over to his enemy's (Idra) base and rapes 20 probes before Idra can even react.
|
Yeah this is true. Blizzard read this seriously, this is one of the reasons why BW is so great, especially as an esport.
|
Dominican Republic825 Posts
On February 27 2010 13:02 wintergt wrote: I think the colossus comes pretty close. I saw this one game (pvp) where the guy sends the first colossus he made calmly over to his enemy's (Idra) base and rapes 20 probes before Idra can even react.
link to replay pls
|
I've been worried and iffy about whether SC2 would be a good game for eSports or not. As for blizzard... They need to realize that just because all the other modern games have pretty graphics, and pretty/easy user interface, it doesn't mean SC2 must include them... Removal of units that made such a big difference in SC1 will be heartbreaking for most, and although it can be argued it strays away from what made StarCraft what it was, it might be necessary. It's a new game after all..
I would heartily enjoy to see SC2 be a successful, thriving, highly skill-dependent game... I know it will never be what brood war was, but we'll see =(
|
those WMD probably created the most excitement, moreso than any micro or macro in the game
|
guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON!
|
On February 27 2010 13:22 cuteFayth wrote: guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON!
Ya that's why there are 2000 people on iccup right now.
Not to mention these are just comparisons to make the game improve you idiot.
|
On February 27 2010 13:25 Zapdos_Smithh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 13:22 cuteFayth wrote: guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON! Ya that's why there are 2000 people on iccup right now. Not to mention these are just comparisons to make the game improve you idiot.
ya rly.
|
I agree. Those factors are what made SC BW great and a true art.
|
Nukes and seeker missiles are not random at all. They have a set target, and a set duration in which to reach that target. Splash by nature is not random. It is set damage at a set radius. Colossus weaponry is not random either. It may be hard to predict the angle in which the beam will go, but it is always perpendicular to the line between the target unit and the colossus. This can be controlled too.
There is nothing artful about the random factor of a scarab and mines. There removal makes skills more important than luck.
|
Isn't the expantion only be for solo campaign ?
|
On February 27 2010 13:13 Re-Play- wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 13:02 wintergt wrote: I think the colossus comes pretty close. I saw this one game (pvp) where the guy sends the first colossus he made calmly over to his enemy's (Idra) base and rapes 20 probes before Idra can even react. link to replay pls
Rise did a commentary on it:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113876
|
On February 27 2010 13:02 wintergt wrote: I think the colossus comes pretty close. I saw this one game (pvp) where the guy sends the first colossus he made calmly over to his enemy's (Idra) base and rapes 20 probes before Idra can even react.
actually he react he just bring his probe to the assimilator where they got snipe
|
Whether or not these "WMD"s as you call them improve gameplay may be debatable, but the excitement they add to the game as a spectator sport is undeniable. It makes me really sad to see them go.
|
Protoss has storm and collossi. Terran has seeker missiles, nukes and tanks (tanks seem a bit weaker but still murder entire armies if in good position). Zerg has banelings and infestors (both of which can burrow for an ambush).
Also units clump up a lot with their improved pathing. I don't see a problem, WMDs are stronger than ever.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On February 27 2010 13:16 TwilightStar wrote: I've been worried and iffy about whether SC2 would be a good game for eSports or not. As for blizzard... They need to realize that just because all the other modern games have pretty graphics, and pretty/easy user interface, it doesn't mean SC2 must include them... Removal of units that made such a big difference in SC1 will be heartbreaking for most, and although it can be argued it strays away from what made StarCraft what it was, it might be necessary. It's a new game after all..
I would heartily enjoy to see SC2 be a successful, thriving, highly skill-dependent game... I know it will never be what brood war was, but we'll see =(
Whats the point of even making a new game if your not gonna change it? What do you want from them.
|
On February 27 2010 13:22 cuteFayth wrote: guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON!
The ignorance is astronomical with this one.
|
any game based entirely on skill and precise battles can only go so far. the wmds from sc1 are still way based on strategy, pros maximize the chance of their opponents running into "shit i lost" moments by their use of wmds(where they place mines and groups of scourge and who reaver targets). wmds make the game a more exciting spectator sport, because they introduce an element which makes audiences go 'wow omg what happened' when the game changes because of them.
on a different subject - not definite about this yet, as I don't have beta, but on user streams, I can't help but get the feeling that armies get too 'clustered' a lot of times. A lot of armies end of looking like a tight mass of seething colors sometimes, and its too hard to separate and identify units, not as in if I really look closely I can't tell, but armies don't seem to have the definition they did in sc1. Maybe its unit models, maybe its the 3d, maybe a combination, but it seems to be lacking something that sc1 did in terms of units. I really miss seeing armies that we naturally and easily divide and identify, like a terran bio army from sc1(blue rines, white meds, red bats) that people could half a third of a second glimpse of and have a perfect idea of the army makeup. I think blizzard should model unit colors and separate them a bit more naturally to give sc2 this characteristic.
|
On February 27 2010 13:25 Zapdos_Smithh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 13:22 cuteFayth wrote: guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON! Ya that's why there are 2000 people on iccup right now. Not to mention these are just comparisons to make the game improve you idiot. this is beta, obviously it will improve
huh idiot?
|
On February 27 2010 13:49 Apexplayer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 13:22 cuteFayth wrote: guys, SC2 is a great game so far, SC1 is dead, MOVE ON! The ignorance is astronomical with this one. ur so new
|
|
|
|