|
On April 16 2012 08:11 TheMatrix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 06:10 Gfire wrote:On April 16 2012 05:53 Grumbels wrote:On April 16 2012 05:10 usethis2 wrote:On April 15 2012 04:15 Falling wrote:
Battle for Middle Earth suffers the same problem most modern RTS have these days. The units' response time between clicking and moving is extremely sluggish and therefore unmicroable no matter how many years the game has been out. Cool atmosphere I agree, but I couldn't stand playing it for every long. Think of every unit with all the response time and speed of the Thor. Do you know why that is the case? I am kind of used to it now, but I really really wanted to know when I first played Blizzard games after years of playing Age of Empires and other genres' games (e.g. shooters/fighting games). Units including workers all felt laggy/sliding/smooth-moving/accelerating instead of responding instantly to my commands. Everything felt less crisp. It took a long time for me to get used to it but I don't know why it has to be that way. You can see this effect in SC2. Move an SCV from point A to point B, it arrives at B as if it was decelerating instead of moving at full speed and making a sudden stop. Same thing when you change directions. It bugged me to no end when I first had to deal with this. Because casual players don't really care about sluggish control as long as the animation and movement look more realistic. If you can move backwards and forwards instantly with no time for the turning animation, then it looks weird. Old games didn't have these constraints, since everything was in 2D, I suppose. Nobody cares if your grunt in WC2 doesn't have a pretty turning animation since it's represented by a sprite anyway. In Starcraft II, Stalkers have a lengthy turning animation while shooting, unlike marines, which means you can never micro stalkers against marines perfectly. But I think it's okay if you have at least some 'twitchy' units. (marines, zerglings) I think Stalkers and Marines have the same turn rate. Marines just have a very low damage point (delay before attack) and backlash (delay after attack). Most units (including stalkers,) have the same stats in these sections because Blizzard never bothered to customize them other than the Marine and Marauder and a few other units. It's lower for Marines and Marauders which is why they are so good at kiting. Edit: In Age of Mythology there was a terrible issue with special abilities. They were all auto abilities and many had long animations with delays. It would make the units bug out and they couldn't decide between attacking normally or going into their special animation if you right clicked anything with them. It was so bad I had to only build units that didn't have special abilities last time I played. Battle for Middle Earth was worse than other games, though. I think it just had sloppy programming. I modded it a fair bit, and was able to adjust things like delays and attack animations, but it didn't really help that much. You just couldn't really have much control over your units no matter what. and guess who was lead designer for battle for middle earth - Dustin Browder All his games have had sluggish controls and unresponsive units
Total Annihilation and SupremeCommander had great control. You can actually strafe with ground, naval and air units. Its a great micro mechanic. I'm shocked more RTSs havent implemented this.
|
So much theory crafting going on in this thread....
Not even near beta!
Let the game go to beta and then we can resume hating on blizz.
|
You haven't even played the game yet. The sky isn't falling. Relax.
I look forward to seeing how HotS shapes up.
|
Canada11367 Posts
On April 16 2012 08:21 scaban84 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 08:11 TheMatrix wrote:On April 16 2012 06:10 Gfire wrote:On April 16 2012 05:53 Grumbels wrote:On April 16 2012 05:10 usethis2 wrote:On April 15 2012 04:15 Falling wrote:
Battle for Middle Earth suffers the same problem most modern RTS have these days. The units' response time between clicking and moving is extremely sluggish and therefore unmicroable no matter how many years the game has been out. Cool atmosphere I agree, but I couldn't stand playing it for every long. Think of every unit with all the response time and speed of the Thor. Do you know why that is the case? I am kind of used to it now, but I really really wanted to know when I first played Blizzard games after years of playing Age of Empires and other genres' games (e.g. shooters/fighting games). Units including workers all felt laggy/sliding/smooth-moving/accelerating instead of responding instantly to my commands. Everything felt less crisp. It took a long time for me to get used to it but I don't know why it has to be that way. You can see this effect in SC2. Move an SCV from point A to point B, it arrives at B as if it was decelerating instead of moving at full speed and making a sudden stop. Same thing when you change directions. It bugged me to no end when I first had to deal with this. Because casual players don't really care about sluggish control as long as the animation and movement look more realistic. If you can move backwards and forwards instantly with no time for the turning animation, then it looks weird. Old games didn't have these constraints, since everything was in 2D, I suppose. Nobody cares if your grunt in WC2 doesn't have a pretty turning animation since it's represented by a sprite anyway. In Starcraft II, Stalkers have a lengthy turning animation while shooting, unlike marines, which means you can never micro stalkers against marines perfectly. But I think it's okay if you have at least some 'twitchy' units. (marines, zerglings) I think Stalkers and Marines have the same turn rate. Marines just have a very low damage point (delay before attack) and backlash (delay after attack). Most units (including stalkers,) have the same stats in these sections because Blizzard never bothered to customize them other than the Marine and Marauder and a few other units. It's lower for Marines and Marauders which is why they are so good at kiting. Edit: In Age of Mythology there was a terrible issue with special abilities. They were all auto abilities and many had long animations with delays. It would make the units bug out and they couldn't decide between attacking normally or going into their special animation if you right clicked anything with them. It was so bad I had to only build units that didn't have special abilities last time I played. Battle for Middle Earth was worse than other games, though. I think it just had sloppy programming. I modded it a fair bit, and was able to adjust things like delays and attack animations, but it didn't really help that much. You just couldn't really have much control over your units no matter what. and guess who was lead designer for battle for middle earth - Dustin Browder All his games have had sluggish controls and unresponsive units Total Annihilation and SupremeCommander had great control. You can actually strafe with ground, naval and air units. Its a great micro mechanic. I'm shocked more RTSs havent implemented this.
Don't know about those two, but SupCom2 has atrocious micro control. It's super sluggish and half the time the tanks smart pathing decides to not attack if you try to focus fire. Try any form of marine stutter step in SupCom2. It doesn't exist as far as I'm aware. Attack flight plans commands are more like pre-planning positioning. But good look trying to turn the aircraft on a dime to do attack, retreat, attack, retreat. SupCom2 is the epitomy of everything I hate about modern RTS's.
Instantaneous response or very close to it is what makes good micro control as far as I am concerned. As fast as you can order, the more effective your troops will be because they will actually do what they will be told. Not every unit needs it, but it is quickly disappearing from most RTS's in favour of 'more realistic' turning arcs.
Do you know why that is the case? I am kind of used to it now, but I really really wanted to know when I first played Blizzard games after years of playing Age of Empires and other genres' games (e.g. shooters/fighting games). Units including workers all felt laggy/sliding/smooth-moving/accelerating instead of responding instantly to my commands. Everything felt less crisp. It took a long time for me to get used to it but I don't know why it has to be that way.
In LoL I can kinda get used to it, but in SC2 I never could get used to it. As soon as I ordered my workers to the patches, I feel it and that's all I can think about because affects every single command I make.
|
On April 16 2012 01:34 haitike wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 01:24 Arkless wrote:On April 16 2012 00:51 Grumbels wrote:On April 15 2012 23:38 Arkless wrote:On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:
[quote]
Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run. These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance. There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table. But can't you see that SC2 is a Red Alert clone and has had no success as a competitive game whatsoever, made by a designer that actively hates the Starcraft franchise?  No, I can't. No success? Dude you're tripping. You only have to watch the battle.net active players. It is a lot less than warcraft3 or broodwar some years ago. Or compared with the beta/season1 there are a abysmall difference in active players. And nobody plays ladder anymore. Blizzard is killing the game.
Even though I am on your side and believe that SC2 should have tried to emulate BW I do not think you can completely put all of the blame of the declining playerbase onto the game as LoL has absolutely soared to being one of the most played games amongst casuals and is just a lot less annoying that SC("OMG FEEDER TEAM QQ" mentality ;p)
I do think that blizzard has killed the casual playerbase because of the UMS' system :/
|
"This gives the protoss army some real reach to force an engagement on their terms in the end-game."
when did protoss have problem forcing engagements on their terms in the end-game... lol
|
On April 16 2012 10:07 NexUmbra wrote:
I do think that blizzard has killed the casual playerbase because of the UMS' system :/
yep blizzard did it, but not only cause of UMS, the whole BN UI in sc2 sux
|
On April 16 2012 18:08 MildSeven wrote:
"This gives the protoss army some real reach to force an engagement on their terms in the end-game."
when did protoss have problem forcing engagements on their terms in the end-game... lol
Everytime zergies run away from their deathball, duh!
|
hell, if hots changes are crap sc2 esports can just stay on wol. most of that stuff seems like something good for bronze league. apparently sc2 is supposed to be easymode where you get free creep and drop defenses and free engagements and free harass and free everything.
|
On April 16 2012 02:05 Mehukannu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 01:55 Autotroph wrote:On April 16 2012 01:37 Pokebunny wrote:On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!" Actually... 20 is eight, eight, four. lol  Yeah surprised nobody clocked this faster I guess that would go to show how annoying it is that it messes up your brain by not being logical or something. =D
Rows of 12 is even better, because 12 can be devided by 2, 3, 4, and 6 whereas 10 can only be devided by 2 and 5 (if you want to get integers). Reason why the duodecimal system is way superior to the decimal system. Dunno why we learn it in school :/
|
Unless they fire Dustin Browder I don't see things getting better on the gameplay part.
Unless they fire Greg Bonaza I don't see thing getting better on the battle.net front.
Unless Chris Metzen stops screwing around through all 3 games the story would suck, if there is any hope for a better story for HOTS then Metzen must focus fully with the other writers on HOTS and not go through all 3 games.
|
For me it is absolutely obvious that the decision to not take ideas from BW is VERY good.
First, those worked well under SC:BW conditions, they will not nececery work well in SC2.
Secondly, they will get lazy. If you can just go and copy from previous titles, you have very low incentive to work hard to create something new. EVENTUALLY Blizard will fmake it right. Does anyone remember how SICK Mothership was in beta, and all the 3953485 changes that were made since beta right into 1.4.3?
HotS will go same way.
Third, they will not get the fairly bad press for "reskinned" BW.
So, to cut it short, you like how BW played? Go play BW. SC2 and BW can coexist perfectly.
Do not squize SC2 innovation.
For one, i hope Blizard will work on Terran casters, especially Raven. It is a a good unit but is ridiculously underused, so needs something, not necesery buff/nerf but something to make it appear in mere than 0,00001% of pro matches.
And Ghost, also needs work. Pre 1.4.3. it was anti caster which soft-countered other casters by EMP, and could do damage to Zerg with snipe and with EMP to protos, now with snipe turned into another anti-caster ability, Ghost is a unit which has only anti-caster spells, which kinda ridiculously overlap, and fairly useless because Ghost doesn`t hard-counter other casters, they have more or less equal duel of EMP/snipe VS Feedback/Fungals.
|
On April 16 2012 09:14 Falling wrote:
Don't know about those two, but SupCom2 has atrocious micro control. It's super sluggish and half the time the tanks smart pathing decides to not attack if you try to focus fire. Try any form of marine stutter step in SupCom2. It doesn't exist as far as I'm aware. Attack flight plans commands are more like pre-planning positioning. But good look trying to turn the aircraft on a dime to do attack, retreat, attack, retreat. SupCom2 is the epitomy of everything I hate about modern RTS's.
Instantaneous response or very close to it is what makes good micro control as far as I am concerned. As fast as you can order, the more effective your troops will be because they will actually do what they will be told. Not every unit needs it, but it is quickly disappearing from most RTS's in favour of 'more realistic' turning arcs.
There is also alternative veiv point. If unit control is not instantenuous, like aircraft flies like IRL, there is sertain amound of skill required to plan on how exactly you plant aproach trajectory of aircraft. At least that was the case of Supreme Comander, and Supreme comander Forged alliance.
The fact that you don`t like doesn`t suddenly make t less interesting.
Oh and by the way why should every RTS have same unit control requrement?
|
On April 12 2012 01:25 rift wrote:
I don't want "cool" stuff, I want a well-designed esport. Blizzard, please stop making units that are explicitly role-specific.
Swallow your pride and use the assistance of Kespa/progamers as was planned. IP rights dispute is over.
This exactly.
|
I'm not sure what everyone has said for the last 80 pages, but I read this as pretty much,
"We have no real idea what we are doing. All the work we've put into development so far has basically been thrown out the window, don't expect this expansion anytime soon. But Zerg is ok....."
|
On April 13 2012 00:16 Tinfoilhat wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 00:09 omgimonfire15 wrote:
I don't understand why people want lurkers back. They don't fulfill the requirement that zerg needs, a good ground siege unit. One scan, one observer, one sporecrawler/ overseer, and tanks and immortals will rain fire down on them and destroy them. Swarm Host is good because it can be out of range of all of that and is dangerous enough that if left alone, will eventually break down the wall (depending on number of defensive units) but are not strong enough that they would survive if the enemy pushed. But they need to get rid of burrowed moving banelings, that is so imba in every single way. The only reason the Swarm Host bothers me is it has no guaranteed damage, it sends out little units but what about when your opponent has enough firepower to just kill them before they get in melee range? It basically seems to fulfill the same role as if I were to simply throw small groups of Zerglings into a meat grinder periodically. In terms of being a siege unit I just don't see it happening quite yet, the only practical use I can see for the Swarm Host is to cut off enemy reinforcement lines, again, the same role a small group of Zerglings can fulfill.
From what i was seeing, it could of been changed but it seemed like they where quite meety. True maybe the first or second wave wont do much but after that? Look at how fast broodlongs can pile up and it seems like the swarm hosts units will be able to tank much more damage then them.
|
Canada11367 Posts
On April 17 2012 11:41 naastyOne wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 09:14 Falling wrote:
Don't know about those two, but SupCom2 has atrocious micro control. It's super sluggish and half the time the tanks smart pathing decides to not attack if you try to focus fire. Try any form of marine stutter step in SupCom2. It doesn't exist as far as I'm aware. Attack flight plans commands are more like pre-planning positioning. But good look trying to turn the aircraft on a dime to do attack, retreat, attack, retreat. SupCom2 is the epitomy of everything I hate about modern RTS's.
Instantaneous response or very close to it is what makes good micro control as far as I am concerned. As fast as you can order, the more effective your troops will be because they will actually do what they will be told. Not every unit needs it, but it is quickly disappearing from most RTS's in favour of 'more realistic' turning arcs.
There is also alternative veiv point. If unit control is not instantenuous, like aircraft flies like IRL, there is sertain amound of skill required to plan on how exactly you plant aproach trajectory of aircraft. At least that was the case of Supreme Comander, and Supreme comander Forged alliance. The fact that you don`t like doesn`t suddenly make t less interesting. Oh and by the way why should every RTS have same unit control requrement?
Every RTS need not have the same unit control. But an RTS designed for competitive play and a spectator sport ought to have a lot of options for rapid response units. It's showmanship and a demonstration of skill and speed at it's finest. Furthermore, when that skill and speed is applied to the overall strategy, they also demonstrate their strategical thought.
There's a reason people get excited and cheer over marine and baneling wars. All the preplanning, set up and manuevering in the world is interesting at a cerebral level, but the moments of sheer awesomess in a game come from split second decisions and split second unit control tipping the battle ever so much in the person with better control's favour, and as they continue their superior control, they gain a greater and greater advantage until they gain the victory.
SupCom2 also has a certain amount of skill in planning exactly what trajectory your aircraft attack, but it's all set up and it's not showmanship. And it's not the sort of thing that is going to get people screaming.
|
So what exactly is terran getting in HOTS now? Just the battle hellion? I liked the idea of a smaller more mobile thor type unit. Why would they get rid of it? And air spider mines and a long range missle launcher sound retarded.
|
I get the feeling they are throwing ideas at the wall and seeing if any of them stick.
They probably call it an 'organic design process'
|
I never understood all the hate for the warhound, I was actually looking forward to it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
