EPTSometimes Manual is better than Automatic
Unit Formations - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
tubster68
Canada59 Posts
Sometimes Manual is better than Automatic | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On May 30 2007 08:12 jim_raynor wrote: A line formation could be useful for zealots and goons (or whatever unit replaces it). Ctrl click on zealot and then set line formation and angle (like in Baldur's Gate 1 if I remember correctly) so that their ranks may face any direction. Same with the ranged unit behind. I don't see anything bad about that ... There also might be some sort of spread formation to minimize damage from splash damage and spells like psi storm. Of course there should be option for no formation at all, but if it proves useful people will start using it. Spread tanks, use siege mode and now you have a better push set than even the best T progammers, it could be fun, but there would be so much crying that it takes away skill from the game, so it won't be implemented  | ||
|
alpskomleko
Slovenia950 Posts
| ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
On May 30 2007 12:52 lololol wrote: Spread tanks, use siege mode and now you have a better push set than even the best T progammers, it could be fun, but there would be so much crying that it takes away skill from the game, so it won't be implemented spread tanks aren't always the best formation. they can actually be quite weak in some situations | ||
|
CROrens
Croatia1005 Posts
On May 30 2007 03:47 WastedYouth wrote: I think its a little too son to be worrying about things like unit formation when nobody even knows the semantics of sc2's micro yet. heh well you can say that for every topic on this forum then. its just in our nature to PREDICT AND LOVE IT  | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
On May 30 2007 12:52 lololol wrote: Spread tanks, use siege mode and now you have a better push set than even the best T progammers, it could be fun, but there would be so much crying that it takes away skill from the game, so it won't be implemented i assure you there will be crying, rightly so. | ||
|
vicml21
Canada165 Posts
| ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On May 29 2007 20:43 ktp wrote: flying v formation! ![[image loading]](http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8499/untitledwo3.jpg) haha <3 Kwack Kwack! XD | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
It just so stupid your units stop and reform all the time. | ||
|
Asta
Germany3491 Posts
didn't you play this game? | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
Rotodyne
United States2263 Posts
On May 31 2007 14:06 Asta wrote: well as the first poster said: sc/bw had formations. as long as they weren't too big, units would stay in formation. didn't you play this game? I think he was referring to an Age of Empires type of formation system. The units go into perfect formation, and move at different speeds depending on where they are in the formation (while turning, etc.) | ||
|
ItchReliever
2489 Posts
| ||
|
DTDominion
United States2148 Posts
On May 29 2007 18:51 marquis wrote: It will probably be like WC3, where formation is a toggle - you can leave it on, but pretty much everyone turns it off. You have to have it in the game though or reviewers will be like, "OMG where are formations??? They add so much to the strategy!" Basically. For some reason now having formations is like a litmus test for having a "legit" RTS. | ||
| ||
