EPTNo unit selection cap? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BluzMan
Russian Federation4235 Posts
| ||
|
EscPlan9
United States2777 Posts
| ||
|
Jyvblamo
Canada13788 Posts
On May 20 2007 14:16 EscPlan9 wrote: You should only be able to select three units at a time - not only because the unit profiles on the bottom would be more detailed and sexy due to the size, but also because it requires more SKILL to handle all your units when you can only control three at a time. Fuck all you noobs who want 12 or more! No, we should return to our primordial roots in Dune 2 and allow only 1 unit selected at any time. Imagine how awesome players would be just by having his army move at the same time. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
I'm trying to think of reasons why I'm not liking the unlimited select, and really - the absolute biggest reason is that it doesn't feel like a blizzard RTS to me when you can do that  16 sounds like a nice number to me. | ||
|
useLess
United States4781 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On May 20 2007 12:19 Jyvblamo wrote: that could be done by trigger though. In the gameplay trailer, there were like 120 zerglings bursting out of nydus worms. Imagine trying to control that smoothly with a 16 unit selection limit. It seems likely that they've decreased the strength of zerglings and increased their numbers significantly (You see how pathetic they were against the ~12 zealots?) so it makes sense to have no selection limit. | ||
|
useLess
United States4781 Posts
On May 20 2007 12:19 Jyvblamo wrote: In the gameplay trailer, there were like 120 zerglings bursting out of nydus worms. Imagine trying to control that smoothly with a 16 unit selection limit. It seems likely that they've decreased the strength of zerglings and increased their numbers significantly (You see how pathetic they were against the ~12 zealots?) so it makes sense to have no selection limit. Gameplay was just a demo. The Zealots were probably fully upgraded against that swarm, and was backed up by the Cols. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On May 20 2007 15:08 useless wrote: Gameplay was just a demo. The Zealots were probably fully upgraded against that swarm, and was backed up by the Cols. Probably upped armor beyond normal and such too. Anyway, I could see have 24 unit control groups but going above that, I can see it negatively affecting gameplay. For example, you accidentally run all of your rines into burrowed lurks (assuming there are lurkers) it takes a certain amount of time to 1click2click3click etc rather than just 1click and stim and all your rines run away safely. | ||
|
Polemarch
Canada1564 Posts
| ||
|
FusionCutter
Canada974 Posts
| ||
|
Zeenix
United States47 Posts
| ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
| ||
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
blizzard isn't just catering to the whim of players that want to make this game as hard as possible on the player with stupid interface limitations. they also have to cater to the casual player, who will quite correctly be pretty pissed if a 2008 game still has a 1998 unit selection cap. sure, it brings *something* to competitive play, but really, is it that big a difference? does it really matter that much? could you beat bisu zvp if you had unlimited unit selection cap? | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On May 20 2007 15:26 GrandInquisitor wrote: unit selection cap is the worst thing to be complaining about, honestly blizzard isn't just catering to the whim of players that want to make this game as hard as possible on the player with stupid interface limitations. they also have to cater to the casual player, who will quite correctly be pretty pissed if a 2008 game still has a 1998 unit selection cap. sure, it brings *something* to competitive play, but really, is it that big a difference? does it really matter that much? could you beat bisu zvp if you had unlimited unit selection cap? Actually, didn't Blizzard say WC3 was catering to the "average" gamer and SC2 would be leaning towards more competitive play? Anyway, I'm sure most of us wouldn't mind a larger control group, but having an unlimited one just seems over the top. | ||
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On May 20 2007 15:34 mahnini wrote: Actually, didn't Blizzard say WC3 was catering to the "average" gamer and SC2 would be leaning towards more competitive play? Anyway, I'm sure most of us wouldn't mind a larger control group, but having an unlimited one just seems over the top. you really think we're the only ones that care about SC2? remember, starcraft was hugely popular among casual gamers too, and blizzard's definitely not going to overlook that. we're talking millions of other people that would love to play starcraft ii, and alienating them with decade-old interface limitations is the fastest way to tank blizzard's reputation for fun games and to kill this community in the long run | ||
|
BaconatedGrapefruit
41 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
funkie
Venezuela9374 Posts
On May 20 2007 15:40 GrandInquisitor wrote: you really think we're the only ones that care about SC2? remember, starcraft was hugely popular among casual gamers too, and blizzard's definitely not going to overlook that. we're talking millions of other people that would love to play starcraft ii, and alienating them with decade-old interface limitations is the fastest way to tank blizzard's reputation for fun games and to kill this community in the long run So no limitation cap for you is amazing? They are saying, they want to keep the "feeling" of the old game, but introduce, new graphics aspects, units and strategies". -_-; I think if they want this to be one of the most, if not the most competitive Game for e-Sport industries, the 12 unit cap should be maintained. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On May 20 2007 15:40 GrandInquisitor wrote: you really think we're the only ones that care about SC2? remember, starcraft was hugely popular among casual gamers too, and blizzard's definitely not going to overlook that. we're talking millions of other people that would love to play starcraft ii, and alienating them with decade-old interface limitations is the fastest way to tank blizzard's reputation for fun games and to kill this community in the long run Umm, I didn't say that at all, I was merely paraphrasing Blizzard's statement. WC3 didn't have unlimited control groups and that was sure popular among casual gamers, there's a point where simplifying becomes OVER-simplifying. Sure, WC3 doesn't come near to the amount of units SC has to control all at once, but I don't see a reason why it should be unlimited. I'm sure the "casual" fan would be fine with 24 unit control groups, it's not like they're retarded or something. | ||
|
Gandalf
Pakistan1905 Posts
A limit of 24 would have been nice. You could have a maxed army with relatively few hotkeys that way. Someone also mentioned seeing multiple buildings being selected with a single hotkey. I think this feature might even be worse, and I hope blizzard scrap it. With no limit for units under a hotkey PLUS being able to macro of 15 hatcheries with a single button will take a whole lot out of what SC was. It'll take out a lot of the speed required in SC. Sure, better players will still win, but thats true for most games. We're looking for a game that builds on what we love about SC. | ||
| ||
