|
This is from another gamespy article:
StarCraft II for example, will regularly field individual armies consisting of 300 units as opposed to the 60 unit limit in Warcraft III.
Also there is stated:
"First you need to understand that art isn't finished until the game ships," Didier continues. Apparently Blizzard goes through hundreds and sometimes thousands of artwork iterations before the design team is satisfied with it. Not only do they continually tweak the graphics to improve the artistic quality but they also work closely with the developers to make sure that the artwork always enhances and supports the gameplay rather than acts as a distraction.
[...]
The slide changed and it showed a few iterations of the Immortal. Some of the changes made to the 3D graphic model in the game included removing the larger guns from the unit's arms and substituting two smaller guns that would be easier to see and give the player a nice visual cue about how they were supposed to be used. The head was also angled back to allow more space for team colors and to let the player see the Protoss embedded inside. Not only is this cool to see, it gives the player more of a sense that The Immortal is their unit -- a sentient being worthy of being used wisely, not thrown away as cannon fodder.
So better looking tanks are only a matter of time i guess =)
|
Well I can't say if this is good or bad, because I simply don't know the player unit limit. If it's 200 like in the original Then id say leave it at 12 or go up to 24... But if the limit well be higher I'd say adjust the limit appropriately to the unit cap. Now the cap is 200 and 1 hot key can get up to 12 units.. that's 16,67 if divided by. So say the new unit cap is 300... make the max number of units in a ground equal to the 16,67.
About the smart casting thing... I don't want to get into a discussion about that. It has both merits and flaws. The only thing certain is we will have to adapt (or not) to what Blizzard puts out.
1 last thing: To the guy @ page 7 about the easy flanking/defiler/etc. combo. Remember we don't know if those units are still in the game, but if you want to play it that way let me remind you of the ease of Maelstorming/Psy storming all of your army dead in it's tracks with 1-2 observers scouting ahead. Or better yet D-webbing all your ranged units 1 by 1 with Sairs. This is theory craft just like yours.
|
dude this is all right. Zerg players sometimes can't even use hotkeys cause of the hatcheries they have. Its a big disadvantage.
Besides....... I think everyone is overrreacting here. Didnt you see the video? Protoss stoped a lot of zling with about 12 units. Protoss seems very strong against zerg now. ITS NOT SC1. Zerg needs this.
|
It's really good they're removing the limit. For Protoss and Terran that are against the removal of it, try limiting yourself to groups of 6 or so in Sc1 to get an idea of how Zerg have it. With no selection limit we'll finally be able to swarm for real with Zerg. Don't worry though. Blizzard will take the selection limit in consideration when balancing, and all races will have their way to deal with things. It's not a remake of Starcraft 1 just with no selection limits.
With the massive armies we're going to see, and with the greater amount of control of them, I think Starcraft II will be even more exciting to observe. Especially when watching real pros.
|
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
|
On May 20 2007 11:54 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2007 11:40 Yogurt wrote:On May 20 2007 11:27 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I'd prefer a number like 12, 16, maybe 20 (seems a lot to me tho).
But most of all I'm concerned they'll let you hotkey all your gates at once AND build from them (if you could hotkey all your gates and rally point them that'd be fine I think).
i wouldnt mind so much if u could hotkey and cycle with tab. but definately not 2 button massing Yeah, I think I actually wrote the exact same thing in another thread, great minds think alike?
But, that is 2 button mashing!.. Only made much easier. Instead of
4z5z6z7z8z9z
one could do instead.
4zTABzTABzTABzTABzTABz
And mash between Tab and Hotkey. This is really easy when you think about since a lot of players already mash 1212121 (a two button mash) just to inflate their APM and its quite easy.
Anyway, about selection. I don't think the selection cap should be increased much. Perhaps 14? BUT, units that take up a 1/2 psi (lings scrouge) should only take up a 1/2 portrait so one could select 28 lings.
Or 20 lings and 4 ultras (14 altogether).
|
United States42596 Posts
Unlimited selection makes things easier for the player and allows them to concentrate on strategy without being limited by arbitrary rules.
And that's why footballers should be allowed to pick the ball up. I mean wtf is going on with this? Moving it along with your feet? Did people not know that the hands are far more flexible and can grip onto the ball unlike feet? Now we know this that rule is simply outdated and prevents better strategic footballers from winning simply because their foot execution isn't great. The game shouldn't be about practicing manipulation of the ball over and over to get an edge. It should be a game of pure skill where things like ball control which tbh only reward massgamers are made simpler.
The game is the game. You achieve a given objective within given parameters. In football it's get the ball in the net using your feet. In starcraft it's get his base on fire using groups of 12 units or less. The rules don't have to be logical. The rules don't have to be what is easiest. The rules are what makes the game challenging and fun.
|
On May 27 2007 21:26 Kwark wrote:
Unlimited selection makes things easier for the player and allows them to concentrate on strategy without being limited by arbitrary rules.
And that's why footballers should be allowed to pick the ball up.
Yes, it's called Rugby/Starcraft 2 :p. Besides, that's a bullshit analogy since the UI of a game, especially a strategy game, is not an inherent part of the "rules" (ie game mechanics). Having a 12 unit selection limit is more like making players play with bare feet. It makes the game harder but not better.
|
On May 27 2007 19:54 quasi -QS- wrote:
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
And you do agree that BW is the best RTS game ever so maybe they should take it as a fucking example.
7 groups of ultra ling flanking from all sides with a single click. ya, whatever.
|
United States42596 Posts
On May 27 2007 22:44 gravity wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2007 21:26 Kwark wrote:
Unlimited selection makes things easier for the player and allows them to concentrate on strategy without being limited by arbitrary rules.
And that's why footballers should be allowed to pick the ball up. Yes, it's called Rugby/Starcraft 2 :p. Besides, that's a bullshit analogy since the UI of a game, especially a strategy game, is not an inherent part of the "rules" (ie game mechanics). Having a 12 unit selection limit is more like making players play with bare feet. It makes the game harder but not better.
No. Rugby has a different set of entirely arbitrary rules which make the game harder.
I'll accept that a higher unit selection would make it easier. And I'll accept that the current selection limit is arbitrary. I just don't see why this is a bad thing. All games have rules which serve no purpose but to make things harder and therefore more skillful.
And UI isn't part of the rules since it goes without saying. The objective doesn't say 'destroy enemy buildings using only selections of 12 units or less' for the same reason it doesn't say 'destroy enemy buildings using no units from NOD or the skrin'. It is still game rules, it just isn't explicit for the same reason that using your tail isn't explicitly banned in football.
|
On May 27 2007 22:50 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2007 19:54 quasi -QS- wrote:
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
And you do agree that BW is the best RTS game ever so maybe they should take it as a fucking example. 7 groups of ultra ling flanking from all sides with a single click. ya, whatever.
I doubt it's going to be quite that simple, and just because BW is the best RTS doesn't mean everything about it is perfect. The interface certainly isn't. I want a game in the same mould and spirit as BW, but not a perfect clone that's too afraid to make minor (yes, minor) improvements.
|
On May 27 2007 23:01 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2007 22:44 gravity wrote:On May 27 2007 21:26 Kwark wrote:
Unlimited selection makes things easier for the player and allows them to concentrate on strategy without being limited by arbitrary rules.
And that's why footballers should be allowed to pick the ball up. Yes, it's called Rugby/Starcraft 2 :p. Besides, that's a bullshit analogy since the UI of a game, especially a strategy game, is not an inherent part of the "rules" (ie game mechanics). Having a 12 unit selection limit is more like making players play with bare feet. It makes the game harder but not better. No. Rugby has a different set of entirely arbitrary rules which make the game harder. I'll accept that a higher unit selection would make it easier. And I'll accept that the current selection limit is arbitrary. I just don't see why this is a bad thing. All games have rules which serve no purpose but to make things harder and therefore more skillful. And UI isn't part of the rules since it goes without saying. The objective doesn't say 'destroy enemy buildings using only selections of 12 units or less' for the same reason it doesn't say 'destroy enemy buildings using no units from NOD or the skrin'. It is still game rules, it just isn't explicit for the same reason that using your tail isn't explicitly banned in football.
Personally I just think that the game should be as easy as control as possible. Even if you can put all your Wraiths and Siege Tanks in the same group, is that something any sane person would do?
Also if the Unlimited Selection works so after you select more then X units the portraits merge into one portrait and a number next to it, won't large groups be bad since you can't see the health of individual units for micro meaning that skillfull players will need to make groups smaller then X?
I agree with the person you quote that the controls arn't really part of the rules but rather like your equipment.
You people are kinda like a person arguing you should still use wooden clubs and balls because iron clubs and high tech balls make the game less skillfull. Or someone arguing that football should still be played in the same shoes they played 50 years ago. In Football hasn't the ball itself gotten improved over the years?
|
On May 27 2007 22:50 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2007 19:54 quasi -QS- wrote:
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
And you do agree that BW is the best RTS game ever so maybe they should take it as a fucking example. 7 groups of ultra ling flanking from all sides with a single click. ya, whatever.
for me this is a only minus of unlimited unit selection.. for other races it won't do much difference... u need to stim your marines and spread them in diff. direction vs lurkers.. u need to make your zealots run on move vs tanks but dragoons attack-move etc
but 100+++ultraling attacking by one click o_O they gotta give protoss some ultimate weapon vs that kind of shito_O otherwise it's GG....
|
On May 28 2007 01:49 lamarine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2007 22:50 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On May 27 2007 19:54 quasi -QS- wrote:
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
And you do agree that BW is the best RTS game ever so maybe they should take it as a fucking example. 7 groups of ultra ling flanking from all sides with a single click. ya, whatever. for me this is a only minus of unlimited unit selection.. for other races it won't do much difference... u need to stim your marines and spread them in diff. direction vs lurkers.. u need to make your zealots run on move vs tanks but dragoons attack-move etc but 100+++ultraling attacking by one click o_O they gotta give protoss some ultimate weapon vs that kind of shito_O otherwise it's GG....
Considering that they have several proffesional gamers playing the game full time to find balance issues I don't think that will be a problem of all things...
Between a few Zealots, some Collossus and some High Templars I think the protoss can handle quite a few ultralings.
|
On May 28 2007 02:33 Zironic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2007 01:49 lamarine wrote:On May 27 2007 22:50 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On May 27 2007 19:54 quasi -QS- wrote:
I think the problem with a lot of the arguments against unlimited unit selection is they are applying it to BW.
SC2 is not BW.
And you do agree that BW is the best RTS game ever so maybe they should take it as a fucking example. 7 groups of ultra ling flanking from all sides with a single click. ya, whatever. for me this is a only minus of unlimited unit selection.. for other races it won't do much difference... u need to stim your marines and spread them in diff. direction vs lurkers.. u need to make your zealots run on move vs tanks but dragoons attack-move etc but 100+++ultraling attacking by one click o_O they gotta give protoss some ultimate weapon vs that kind of shito_O otherwise it's GG.... Considering that they have several proffesional gamers playing the game full time to find balance issues I don't think that will be a problem of all things... Between a few Zealots, some Collossus and some High Templars I think the protoss can handle quite a few ultralings.
/me crossing fingers :D
so if they balance that issue ican't see anything bad about unlimited selection....
same for multiple building selection=)
so far the game is great... can't wait for blizzcon so they annouce some new great stuff:D
|
Yeah I really hope they will release some more info about the game on Blizzcon  maybe even update the site ? ^.- at least that's what im hoping for =P. Well it wouldn't hurt if Pillars would come here and straighten a few things up for us ;P. All this theroycraft is yummy to read but I think we're pushing it a little too much onto personal attacks and strategies"this is how i would rape you if this wold be implimented right now" types =P. All in all they said that BW and Sc2 will be two different games so don't expect all your old strats to work. When sc2 is realease there might not be even the core units of the "ultraling" ;o
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
