Feel free to keep me accountable to delivering consistent updates of answers for you regarding Starcraft 2.
Hope you enjoy. Please keep SC2 question requests to the above link and NOT on this thread.
-----Starcraft 2 Q&A Batch 2-----
The answers given below reflect StarCraft IIs game mechanics at this early stage of development. These mechanics are subject to change with further testing and balancing.
1) Will players be able to select multiple buildings simultaneously?
We are directing much attention to polishing and improving the user interface. On that note, players will definitely be able to select and build from multiple buildings at the same time. You cannot drag-select buildings, but you can shift-click on them and add them to a control-group for ease of unit production.
2) Will workers auto-gather resources if the rally point is set to a mineral node or a geyser?
Of course.
3) Will we be able to select more than 12 units at the same time?
Currently, unit selection is unlimited, but this may change with further development and testing.
4) On a given map, will there be one Mothership per map or one Mothership unit per Protoss player allowed?
We are still testing out many possible circumstances in order to make skirmishes more fun and challenging. At this time, each Protoss player will be able to have only one Mothership at a given time, but as mentioned, everything is still subject to change.
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
You mean microing?
But if you have your cc rallied on a mineral field, when you want an scv/probe/drone to build with and you don't pay attention when you build a new one, it'll go gather some minerals, so you'll have to either grab it as it's en route to the minerals or grab it after it's started mining which will waste your time.
So the retards will just hurt themselves using auto gathering, it'll also be easier to hit their economy with a dropoff if all their scv's being built run straight into your units and they have to choose a new rally.
does anyone else think its really retarded to make a limit of one mothership per player?...it sounds too much like C&C or some other horrid rts like that too me
Interesting the way he says you definitely can select multiple buildings and workers definitely start working from a rally. A lot of people have been upset over these kinds of changes, but the more I think about it, I believe it will all be for the better. Personally, I'm always short on control groups in SC1, so anything to free up numbers and prevent constant reassigning is great for that one fact alone.
And I say interesting in the WAY he says it because it's as if these options are so expected, that some other UI options are going to come up that we aren't totally expecting.
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
You mean microing?
But if you have your cc rallied on a mineral field, when you want an scv/probe/drone to build with and you don't pay attention when you build a new one, it'll go gather some minerals, so you'll have to either grab it as it's en route to the minerals or grab it after it's started mining which will waste your time.
So the retards will just hurt themselves using auto gathering, it'll also be easier to hit their economy with a dropoff if all their scv's being built run straight into your units and they have to choose a new rally.
you could just as easily pick another off? dont get what youre saying.
but no, it's the end of macroing. while i think that auto worker rally is dumb (im a zerg player, wtf do i do? aside from the fact is automizing the game further) that's not my main complaint. wait til late game zvp, when instead of having to cycle threw my 0-5 hotkeys and my f-keys to mass, i can hotkey 15 hatches to 0 and reload with 1 button.
you no longer need to flash back late game and macro at the same time, you can just simply hit 0 sh and PRESTO! 100 worth of hydra one shot. even if i want to divesify it, 0 is like 2/3 of my hatches, i make lings with. i key another 2-3 to 9 and make those my ultra building hatches. 8 can be casters. it completely removes the macro element. it's not just the strats that make the pros so awesome to watch. its the fact that july can assrape your scvs all while double expoing and keeping his econ under 300/300 the entire time.
That WOULD be the end to macro if the other player couldn't do the exact same goddamn thing. "Oh no, now he can produce a lot of units at once! Wait... so can I!" Macro isn't just producing units - it's knowing when to produce what unit - saving up resources for upgrades or expansions and shit.
I can't say it's surprising that the game will have multiple-building selection, but it does beg the question of whether the Subgroup concept from War3 will return.
the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
On June 18 2007 12:50 Hans-Titan wrote: Watch out, Blizzard, watch out. We already have WC3, and we are not interested in a space version.
Sad news
WTF, how are these changes going to make it like WC3? The gameplay in SC2 just from the looks says it will be a competely different game -_-;;. There is more to WC3 and SC2 then just mineral rally and multiple building selection..
As for the mothership, I hope it is very powerful because for all the time and resources spent to make it, it better be worth it. Like massing carriers, there is a huge window where Protoss is opened to a Terran rush.
On June 18 2007 12:54 Excalibur_Z wrote: I can't say it's surprising that the game will have multiple-building selection, but it does beg the question of whether the Subgroup concept from War3 will return.
Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
5) Will Browder be fired for making such imcompetent decisions? - I hope so. 6) Will you remove the mothership for the sake of starcraft. - No it is motherfucking cool to have superweapons, that is what Brood War always needed, I am glad we can finally add this fucking cool uber feature in the game!!!!
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
On June 18 2007 13:01 Naib wrote: Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
ffs, you guys better left click on move and left click on the area you want to move to everytime you move a unit. and you better left click on attack and then left click on the unit you want to attack for each unit you're attacking. if you use right click for any of these functions then you're just a fucking hypocrite then aren't you
Lol I've been preparing mentally for multiple building selection and auto-mine with rally points ever since they announced the game..
So far the more details they announce about the new mechanics the less worried I become (ie straight up multiple building selection would worry me, but protoss seems to have some pretty interesting ways of actually using it + you cant even click/drag buildings so I mean, I really can't wait to find out more).
The mothership, while I'm not in love with it, is not something worth worrying about in the least imo.. The multiple-building selection is the only real thing I'm worried about but much less so than I initially was.
P.S A lot of people in this topic need to ride the catapult D.S
P.P.S TalentedTom style D.D.S
P.P.P.S That means what you write physically hurts my brain D.D.D.S
On June 18 2007 13:01 Naib wrote: Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
ffs, you guys better left click on move and left click on the area you want to move to everytime you move a unit. and you better left click on attack and then left click on the unit you want to attack for each unit you're attacking. if you use right click for any of these functions then you're just a fucking hypocrite then aren't you
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
On June 18 2007 13:01 Naib wrote: Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
ffs, you guys better left click on move and left click on the area you want to move to everytime you move a unit. and you better left click on attack and then left click on the unit you want to attack for each unit you're attacking. if you use right click for any of these functions then you're just a fucking hypocrite then aren't you
OH MANS, YOU GOTS ME FIGURED OUT.
must you be such a tool every time you post?
Says the guy who thinks macro will become obsolete because of a rally-mine function. What do you expect when you jump to the fucking conclusion like that.
On June 18 2007 13:12 FrozenArbiter wrote: High templar
Wasn't it the "Star Relic"?
Star Relic: When it comes to casting spells the Star Relic makes the High Templar look like an armature. It'll be able to create a cloak field that will conceal even buildings, and fire a fusion beam that slowly damages a target until it dies -and when it dies it'll explode and cause damage to everything around it. Remember the larger the target the bigger the boom.
Still, it wouldn't be efficient to hotkey EVERY unit producing building at one time, ESPECIALLY for Zerg because they can't undo their mistake. They'd have to hotkey maybe 1/3 of their Hatcheries and devote those to Hydra production, another 1/3 to Lings, and another 1/3 to Mutas or something.
As for Protoss and Terran, they have to do the same with their Gates/Facts/Barracks, otherwise they can queue a Goon/Tank in every one, go back to each Gateway/Fact individually and cancel it for a Zeal, which makes it a pain anyway.
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
Completely agree, artifical interface limitations are a very dumb way of making the game harder, you should be fighting your opponent, not the interface or some neutral creeps
On June 18 2007 13:12 FrozenArbiter wrote: High templar
Wasn't it the "Star Relic"?
So you can't find the difference between a living unit that looks very much like the one in sc1 and a flying ship?!? Not to mention there is a picture of the star relic in another thread.
P.S. Hawk, must you be such a tool every time you post?
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
On June 18 2007 13:01 Naib wrote: Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
ffs, you guys better left click on move and left click on the area you want to move to everytime you move a unit. and you better left click on attack and then left click on the unit you want to attack for each unit you're attacking. if you use right click for any of these functions then you're just a fucking hypocrite then aren't you
OH MANS, YOU GOTS ME FIGURED OUT.
must you be such a tool every time you post?
Says the guy who thinks macro will become obsolete because of a rally-mine function. What do you expect when you jump to the fucking conclusion like that.
actually i said it in reference to the multiple building selection concept. i still think aut rally is retarded, but its not gonna kill macro.
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
On June 18 2007 13:01 Naib wrote: Ah come on, no multiselection and auto gathering please =/ it takes out half the need for speed. Although it may be recompensated with waay bigger diversity of units in battles, thus bigger need for micro (first time I say this, but W3ish anyone? :S )
ffs, you guys better left click on move and left click on the area you want to move to everytime you move a unit. and you better left click on attack and then left click on the unit you want to attack for each unit you're attacking. if you use right click for any of these functions then you're just a fucking hypocrite then aren't you
OH MANS, YOU GOTS ME FIGURED OUT.
must you be such a tool every time you post?
Says the guy who thinks macro will become obsolete because of a rally-mine function. What do you expect when you jump to the fucking conclusion like that.
actually i said it in reference to the multiple building selection concept. i still think aut rally is retarded, but its not gonna kill macro.
I think the fact remains that anyone who is already in the process of calling Blizzard dumb is going to get flamed. Shit like limitless unit selection seems retarded to SC players already but this is still the alpha stage, nothing is set in stone.
the auto-gather rally point change is just fine, the game is still going to be macro focused, the more important things to worry about will be how to defend expos, where and when to build them, rather than having to make sure your workers are being sent to mine. you still have to remember to keep going back to your expos to constantly produce workers, that task is enough in and of itself. people don't get it that sc2 is not going to be anything like wc3.
If you people think wc3's macro is easy and insignificant due to auto-rally-gather and multiple building selection features then you're an idiot who doesn't understand WC3 at all.
the pros with high APM will still outmacro lower APMs. Keep in mind Multiple Building Selection won't exactly make production as easy as you probably think it does, because of unit mixes and resource management. For the most part you're not going to just wanna build one kind of unit out of a type of building, you're going to wanna control how many build what, and that takes effort to do even if you split your buildings (like 3 factories into binding 1, 4 into binding 2). Also given that most of the time you should (if macroing well) not have an excess of resources so you'd have to spend carefully, which makes multiple building selection less useful. So really speed will still be a big deal for the most part, those who are faster will still macro more efficiently and be able to sort of 'micromanage' their buildings faster. For example, (using the example of current zerg units as we don't know the new ones), selecting all hatches, de-selecting 3 and then making zerglings. Then selecting all again and select 1 of the idle ones to make scourge. Then repeating that process to make defilers, and repeating again to make hydras from the last idle hatch.
One thing i'm wondering about though is Zerg, how will worker rally point work then? you dont want your zerglings and what not rallying to minerals, unless they change the mechanics of production or have a special rally point for workers only, that could be a pain, that nexus and command centers won't have an issue with.
As for unlimited unit selection, instead of just saying 'I don't like it' how about giving a reason why it's going to make the game worse.
Obviously SC2 will be far different from BW in terms of mechanics. Stop thinking about auto-rally/multi building selection in the context of BW and try to think about the virtues of it in a game that functions in a very different way.
Here's an example:
If you have 5 hatches set to one key and accidentally press "s" twice (like I do all the time because I'm awful at zerg) you now have 30 scourge that you didn't want and no larva! o_0
Obviously there are many things I'm not taking into account when I come up with this idea, because I can't separate myself from BW, having not played SC2.
That is the flaw of thinking about this stuff as if it's a patch change to BW. Wait to learn more about the strategic and mechanical elements of the game before you trash such trivial aspects of it.
Some of you need to stop thinking with your apm. Its not apm that separates players, you won't get beaten by a fastest newb just because he is a few seconds slower making units.
If you stop this and think of the important things that make starcraft so immortal: The pace, the balance, the simplicity, diversity and ease of use. Maybe you can change your mind.
If they are nydus worms poping out everywhere, reapers harassing your probe line, you will need a ton of alot more speed to keep up supply and expands while defending that.
We are still testing out many possible circumstances in order to make skirmishes more fun and challenging. At this time, each Protoss player will be able to have only one Mothership at a given time, but as mentioned, everything is still subject to change.
I'm a "macro" player, macro in the crudest go-back-to-your-base-to-build-probes-pylons-and-gateways kind of way, I can manage multiple bases but I don't really have a feel for probe cutting or any of those advanced techniques. Most of the games that I win are through that "skill" alone, I rarely gather less resources than my opponent. When I try to do a timing attack or cheese, I fail more often than I succeed because I don't know what I'm doing. In many of my games I've seen my opponents be crushed by the wrong unit in great numbers, only because of better economy.
And I think these news are good news.
Pros will always find ways to amaze us, bashing keys isn't all they do.
On June 18 2007 12:54 Excalibur_Z wrote: I can't say it's surprising that the game will have multiple-building selection, but it does beg the question of whether the Subgroup concept from War3 will return.
what's subgroup concept??
In War3, units are grouped by type. So if your Control Group #1 consists of 1 Mountain King, 3 Sorceresses, 3 Priests, and 5 Footmen, pressing Tab while this Control Group is selected would select the Sorceresses, allowing access to their specific abilities (Slow, Invisibility, Polymorph). When a unit's special ability is used via Subgroups, only one unit actually performs the action, compared to SC where casting Psi Storm with two Templar selected will have both cast at the same time, and this is to conserve caster mana/energy. However, when you issue any of the five major actions (Move, Stop, Attack, Patrol, Hold) it moves the entire group, not just the Sorceresses. Subgroups are a way to micro more quickly without having to use up precious Control Group real-estate (whereas in SC you would have to use a separate control group for a spellcaster unit to achieve a similar result).
Did you know? By polishing the interface, allowing things such as unlimited selection, auto-gather resources, etc., Blizzard is not destroying the game. Guess what, remembering to check if your workers are harvesting resources is barely skill, it's something that you get used to doing after playing the game for a sufficient amount of time and it becomes reflex. If bashing the noob who can't do that is so important to you, stick to SC1. Junk like that shouldn't decide games, tactics, game feel, etc., should.
Also, did you know the game is in pre-alpha and Blizzard is focusing on making the game DIFFERENT from WC3? Guess what, the "WC3 in space" complaints are retarded. Is there a way that Blizzard can bitch-slap everyone that complains about their pre-alpha game only to pretend they fully supported Bliz two years later when SC2 comes out and turns out to be great?
Why pay attention to hawk, he can't even separate micro from macro. Listen more to FA and Manablue if you wanna read some sensible things. As for the rest, personally I never expected that they would not make workers auto mine and tbh, I don't care.
As for the multiple building select, people are aware right that the whole new toss way of producing units is hard enough as it is for example without wasting warp time and it would be totally unworkable without multi building select?
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
you'll still have to adjust the rally every so often unless you want all your workers on one side
gosus will probably end up shifting that rally around right before the worker pops extensively to guarantee maximum mining efficiency in the early game and beyond, so basically all you whiners need to stop obsessing over every minor gameplay artifact in SC. there are some things that it makes no sense to keep except for some perverted sense of skill. for fucks sake, such a comparatively minor change like auto-rally doesn't mean you're suddenly going to be able to beat iloveoov.
Many have said this, but i need to reiterate it. Starcraft 2 is going to be centered around macro a whole lot. Blizzard has said it themselves. They'll probably add certain things to make macro more complex. Like maybe three resources instead of two. I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing, if they remove something they are going to have to add something else that you need to pay attention to instead.
Star Relic: When it comes to casting spells the Star Relic makes the High Templar look like an armature. It'll be able to create a cloak field that will conceal even buildings, and fire a fusion beam that slowly damages a target until it dies -and when it dies it'll explode and cause damage to everything around it. Remember the larger the target the bigger the boom.
If you guys cry about rally points and shit-click buildings now, i don't wan't to be here when sc2 is released.
Seriously, when you start to fell in love with this game, was all you tought like "it's so cool to order each and everyone of my workers to mine"? I'm not saying we don't need that, but im much more worried about other parts of this game. And just because Blizzard says they want to make it sooo competitive, doesn't mean it's going to be good.
So for the love of sc1...don't allways jump on every line blizzard posts. Have at least a little bit patience and don't get hyped up to much.
I've heard a lot of complaints about how zerg have no chance anymore because they can't take advantage of the rally point auto-mine system, but it seems pretty simple just to devote one hatchery out of your 6-7 to drones and have that one rallied. It's not rocket science.
On June 18 2007 17:49 5HITCOMBO wrote: I've heard a lot of complaints about how zerg have no chance anymore because they can't take advantage of the rally point auto-mine system, but it seems pretty simple just to devote one hatchery out of your 6-7 to drones and have that one rallied. It's not rocket science.
there will be PLENTY of ways for the pros to separate themselves from the newbies.
multiple building selection and rally-mine will NOT turn newbies into pros, or even close the gap between them considerably.
if anything, minor changes like this will make TIMING and STRATEGY bigger factors in the outcome of the game and make HAND SPEED a slightly smaller factor.
I sometimes wonder what possible announcement Blizzard could make that would NOT cause mouuntains of newbs to cry and hammer furiously at their keyboards. Then I realize it is an impossibility, and that the game developer's skin must be thick very early.
I'm actually liking the features listed here. I've had several arguments with my brother about putting artificial limitations into the game to make it "more similar" to the BW. I don't see the need to conform so strictly with what people are used to in order to appease the masses. I'd rather have pros who master a different game rather than SC:BW with nicer graphics. This means new gameplay mechanics (like the changes listed here), as well as new units, even maybe a few new aspects that might not have been there before.
On June 18 2007 18:11 OrderlyChaos wrote: I'm actually liking the features listed here. I've had several arguments with my brother about putting artificial limitations into the game to make it "more similar" to the BW. I don't see the need to conform so strictly with what people are used to in order to appease the masses. I'd rather have pros who master a different game rather than SC:BW with nicer graphics. This means new gameplay mechanics (like the changes listed here), as well as new units, even maybe a few new aspects that might not have been there before.
Don't forget, you're also arguing with people who were too naive or ignorant to see that the game was going to be in 3D despite their outcries. If those people want Starcraft, they can play Starcraft.
I don't care really about the multiple buildings and automatic workers. Even if Zerg gets somewhat screwed over by rallies. Simplified interface does not a Warcraft 3 make.
What I do worry about, however, is Blizzard thinking that "since they have to devote less handspeed to macro, let's have them devote MORE handspeed to micro!" and then give every unit 2/3 special abilities/upgrades/what have you.
That would make it quite WC3-ish.
However, it's still at least a year, probably 2, maybe 3 until release. So just sit and wait.
On June 18 2007 18:16 Last Romantic wrote: I don't care really about the multiple buildings and automatic workers. Even if Zerg gets somewhat screwed over by rallies. Simplified interface does not a Warcraft 3 make.
What I do worry about, however, is Blizzard thinking that "since they have to devote less handspeed to macro, let's have them devote MORE handspeed to micro!" and then give every unit 2/3 special abilities/upgrades/what have you.
That would make it quite WC3-ish.
However, it's still at least a year, probably 2, maybe 3 until release. So just sit and wait.
The game has a LONG way to go before it can even remotely be called "WC3-ish". War3 dealt primarily with Heroes and gaining levels and using items and buffs and debuffs and healing/damage spells and shops and attacking neutral enemies. While that makes for a fun single-player experience (with regards to installation levels) and could perhaps be a cool addition to the campaign (persistent heroes that strengthen over missions), everybody knows that doesn't equate to a competitive, balanced, multiplayer experience.
On June 18 2007 18:11 OrderlyChaos wrote: I'm actually liking the features listed here. I've had several arguments with my brother about putting artificial limitations into the game to make it "more similar" to the BW. I don't see the need to conform so strictly with what people are used to in order to appease the masses. I'd rather have pros who master a different game rather than SC:BW with nicer graphics. This means new gameplay mechanics (like the changes listed here), as well as new units, even maybe a few new aspects that might not have been there before.
Don't forget, you're also arguing with people who were too naive or ignorant to see that the game was going to be in 3D despite their outcries. If those people want Starcraft, they can play Starcraft.
The rest of us will be playing Starcraft 2.
On that note, the clunkiness of the war3 engine comes down to 3 major factors
1) fps stuttering, which can be solved by getting a better computer 2) units don't turn around instantly, which has nothing to do with the game being 3d (and can be easily changed in the map editor) 3) unit movement speed is like having an army of fucking reavers in general, which again, has nothing to do with the game being 3d
On June 18 2007 18:22 Zanno wrote: 1) fps stuttering, which can be solved by getting a better computer 2) units don't turn around instantly, which has nothing to do with the game being 3d (and can be easily changed in the map editor) 3) unit movement speed is like having an army of fucking reavers in general, which again, has nothing to do with the game being 3d
What do you think about loading? 3D games loads longer than 2D games because they got to transfer a lot of data to the GPU. I had a slow 2ghz computer with 2 GB RAM and WC3 took a while to load replays. On the other hand, I saw World of Warcraft on a top end computer (DX10 videocard) load almost instantly from one stage to another, but it was a different game.
I like to watch a lot replays, but fear that all the loading will decrease my replay watching.
Perhaps someone knows if there was new improvement in loading 3D games in hardware especially in hardware that supports Pixel Shader 2.0.
On June 18 2007 18:18 NotSorry wrote: Really not a big fan of this whole "mothership" and super unit types.
THANK YOU!!! I'm glad at least one person agrees with my view of the mothership....having one super unit is basically like having a hero which is exactly what Blizzard said they DIDN'T want to have. (makes it too much like wc3 which they also said they don't want) I feel that if you are going to make the mothership a unit....make it have a set control cost and make it expensive but DONT make it so you are only able to make one at a time...it makes no sense.... as if the protoss would say "okay we have this super strong weapon but we can only use ONE at a time because anymore would be unfair to the other races" i mean either take it out or take out the one at a time thing PLZ
I hope people agree with me and im not just crazy and over-exaggerating a small thing
On June 18 2007 18:18 NotSorry wrote: Really not a big fan of this whole "mothership" and super unit types.
THANK YOU!!! I'm glad at least one person agrees with my view of the mothership....having one super unit is basically like having a hero which is exactly what Blizzard said they DIDN'T want to have. (makes it too much like wc3 which they also said they don't want) I feel that if you are going to make the mothership a unit....make it have a set control cost and make it expensive but DONT make it so you are only able to make one at a time...it makes no sense.... as if the protoss would say "okay we have this super strong weapon but we can only use ONE at a time because anymore would be unfair to the other races" i mean either take it out or take out the one at a time thing PLZ
I hope people agree with me and im not just crazy and over-exaggerating a small thing
Yeah, I know! The mothership has to creep and destroy neutral units to become st0ng! Z0/\/\G!! U R GENUS!!! </sarcasm>
Please get over yourself. We have not even seen what it takes to build a mothership, much less if they are going to end up being a viable unit. What happens if they turn out to be the Scout of SC2?
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
QFT
There's no point of creating a "more fancy" version of the original sc. I say they should make it midway between wc3 and sc. That way you have a choice: sc, sc2 or wc3. I'm pretty sure they want sc to survive. I'm also pretty sure that on hype and storyline alone sc2 will sell like a motherfucker!
On June 18 2007 18:07 Manifesto7 wrote: I sometimes wonder what possible announcement Blizzard could make that would NOT cause mouuntains of newbs to cry and hammer furiously at their keyboards. Then I realize it is an impossibility, and that the game developer's skin must be thick very early.
People already cry whenever Blizzard patches the game. No wonder why the go 'boo-hoo' crazy with SC2.
By the way I have to laugh at people who say that Zerg will be screwed? You honestly think Blizzard won't make it at least fair for all the races? Heh ;/
Multiple building select, even if it's different from StarCraft, is perfectly valid. It just creates the need for a new macro system.
Unlimited unit select though way oversimplifies mass unit micro.
Auto-gathering minerals, unless Zerg unit production changes, completely fucks them over. All the suggested ways of simplifying it don't work because as it stands, Zerg Drone count has to be very consciously controlled. Moreso than Terran and Protoss.
I try to suppress my urge to get pissed off at every change. Because hey this is StarCraft 2, not StarCraft in 3D. But that doesn't automatically make every change valid either.
Multiple building select, even if it's different from StarCraft, is perfectly valid. It just creates the need for a new macro system.
Unlimited unit select though way oversimplifies mass unit micro.
Auto-gathering minerals, unless Zerg unit production changes, completely fucks them over. All the suggested ways of simplifying it don't work because as it stands, Zerg Drone count has to be very consciously controlled. Moreso than Terran and Protoss.
I try to suppress my urge to get pissed off at every change. Because hey this is StarCraft 2, not StarCraft in 3D. But that doesn't automatically make every change valid either.
you'll probably end up having 1 or 2 control groups for your various forces on the maps and then several smaller control groups to micro properly. i know that's what i'm planning. can you seriously think of a situation in which you'd want your ENTIRE army to attack a single unit, even a carrier? 100 goliaths aren't going to be able to be in range all at once.
as for drones, don't you have to move the rally in the first place if you're going from drones to army regardless?
Multiple building select, even if it's different from StarCraft, is perfectly valid. It just creates the need for a new macro system.
Unlimited unit select though way oversimplifies mass unit micro.
Auto-gathering minerals, unless Zerg unit production changes, completely fucks them over. All the suggested ways of simplifying it don't work because as it stands, Zerg Drone count has to be very consciously controlled. Moreso than Terran and Protoss.
I try to suppress my urge to get pissed off at every change. Because hey this is StarCraft 2, not StarCraft in 3D. But that doesn't automatically make every change valid either.
Sending your entire force on a-move is barely micro or you're gonna dodge lurker spines with all your marines at once by just giving them a move command or something...?
i only got to the third page then got angry that no on bought it up in full detail yet....
have u guys read over the massive thread about protoss new unit production? from the looks of things and some of the concepts (that look fairly accurate at this point) apm and timing to build units etc. will be more important than ever, hell, we might even look back at sc1 and say "lol, you could queue units at any time in that newby game..." Macro is going to be more separated, even at the pro level, then ever before (assuming that they have new ways of terran production).
and the game will still be fast paced, so thats not to say that it will now just be a macro oriented game, plus the fact with all the terrain-ignoring units we've seen such as the reaper and the Colossus.
as people have said, stop just adding the concepts they came up with straight into bw... Yes is u added the protoss units they've given us now they would DEMOLISH zerg/terran in sc:bw, yes, if they made multiple building selection and auto-mining probes to bw, it would make the game much easier, but its an entirely new game and anyone bitching isn't look past the fact that these arnt the only things being changed...
The most important thing for sc 2 to be fun is pace and balance. If they do this right, then it should be a great game Something like rally mining isn't going to mean shit.
On June 18 2007 18:16 Last Romantic wrote: I don't care really about the multiple buildings and automatic workers. Even if Zerg gets somewhat screwed over by rallies. Simplified interface does not a Warcraft 3 make.
What I do worry about, however, is Blizzard thinking that "since they have to devote less handspeed to macro, let's have them devote MORE handspeed to micro!" and then give every unit 2/3 special abilities/upgrades/what have you.
That would make it quite WC3-ish.
However, it's still at least a year, probably 2, maybe 3 until release. So just sit and wait.
Yeah, I am worry about that too. That would be insanely hard to master with one spell counter another spell then another spell counter the counter spell the fourth one reactivate the first spell and so on. That would be retarded. I rather have them keep the units simple, so it would be the same old location oriented battles.
And for those who think that with the better interface you will be able to beat savior, think again. The better interface apply to him as well. With less time spend on moving his workers around. He will have more time to perfect his timing and his over all game plan.
1) without multiple building selection protoss new production technique is unworkable
2) rally workers automine doesn't shaft zerg half as hard as some of you state since zerg has if they dont change things like what? 10-13 workers max per 8 patches? That just means theyll have to micro/control those 10 units to their mineral patches. Let alone that this "fucks them over", taking a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit more control to optimize hardly requires qualifies are "fucking something over".
(What cracks me up is that its the same people complaining it makes the game too easy and now they complain its unfair. Just looking to troll.)
3) Spells, even though I detest autocast spells, I wouldnt mind a bit more abilities as long as its not autocast. I just piss on the concept. It was just needed on medic heal or it wouldn't be workable in combat at least.
4) 1 extra strong unit for the protoss? Why give a toss (pun intended). Who knows it even viable and what the hell to get it produced as alot of people state. It just looks like a blockade breaker to me tbh. Just the black hole ircs me to no end as its cast and then kill way too much shit. Ah well, well see :p.
i cant wait to destroy people with my mothership and then hear newbs cry about it when I do it's going to be soooooo great. or to play against newbs who only go for the mothership unit and when they lose it they will QQ bahahaha
Multiple building select, even if it's different from StarCraft, is perfectly valid. It just creates the need for a new macro system.
Unlimited unit select though way oversimplifies mass unit micro.
Auto-gathering minerals, unless Zerg unit production changes, completely fucks them over. All the suggested ways of simplifying it don't work because as it stands, Zerg Drone count has to be very consciously controlled. Moreso than Terran and Protoss.
I try to suppress my urge to get pissed off at every change. Because hey this is StarCraft 2, not StarCraft in 3D. But that doesn't automatically make every change valid either.
Sending your entire force on a-move is barely micro or you're gonna dodge lurker spines with all your marines at once by just giving them a move command or something...?
I'm not saying you wouldn't need to micro Marines and Tanks and whatnot. But you can still have a master movement command to keep your army together for more easily.
It's more about Protoss and Zerg though than Terran. Zerg's unit numbers are massive and thus take a skill to control. And Protoss armies often move around in large numbers, if not as big as Zerg.
I'm not saying the unit selection should be more than 12, but taking it away is a huge huge mistake.
On June 18 2007 18:18 NotSorry wrote: Really not a big fan of this whole "mothership" and super unit types.
THANK YOU!!! I'm glad at least one person agrees with my view of the mothership....having one super unit is basically like having a hero which is exactly what Blizzard said they DIDN'T want to have. (makes it too much like wc3 which they also said they don't want) I feel that if you are going to make the mothership a unit....make it have a set control cost and make it expensive but DONT make it so you are only able to make one at a time...it makes no sense.... as if the protoss would say "okay we have this super strong weapon but we can only use ONE at a time because anymore would be unfair to the other races" i mean either take it out or take out the one at a time thing PLZ
I hope people agree with me and im not just crazy and over-exaggerating a small thing
Yeah, I know! The mothership has to creep and destroy neutral units to become st0ng! Z0/\/\G!! U R GENUS!!! </sarcasm>
Please get over yourself. We have not even seen what it takes to build a mothership, much less if they are going to end up being a viable unit. What happens if they turn out to be the Scout of SC2?
me not liking the mothership makes me have an ego problem? "ok"
Well, if they facilitate resource-gathering and macro, they have to balance this by making the game more microintensive. (The macro-solutions are good btw, and fully agree with them)
BW already had a ridiculous ceiling when it came to microing, positioning, move-fire commands, spells etc, and this must at least remain. So far, we know that attack-move will be more powerful, move-fire repeat commands less important, due to longer firing animations, better pathing and AI, lower cooldown on some units (like immortal and stalker). The dragoon was THE fire-move repeat unit in BW for instance.
So hopefully they don't botch that, and this is at the core of the game. Not just microing with spells, but movement and positioning as well should matter (no, I'm not talking about highground advantages or things like that). For all we know, the zealot charge ability may prove a curse in some instances with a few breaking formation due to enemy lure feints. But thats easy enough to fix, just make them only activate charge from player command, not AI response to attack or proximity etc..
Still hopeful, but I'm still sceptical since basically all games released these past 3 years have been thouroughly bland mainstream retardedness for kids with the attention span of a goldfish.
Edit: The mothership has to diediedie and warpray blows chunks also. Oh, the silversurfer (read soulhunter) units also sucks. That's already 3 static beam attackers... The colossus I can live with, since it makes sense in concept, but the rest can just die!
I really don't like how Blizzard managed to ruin StarCraft II.
Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games. And i just hate how they try do make things "easier". We're not retards, i love BW because of the things that make it harder, like having to select each gate/fact/hatch etc to produce units.The fact that only zerg could produce 12 units at once was giving balance to the game, having all the races do that shit only ruins it.
Oh, and unlimited unit selection is crap too. If I wanna select 1234554355 units at once i use a hack, but i don't want to! This thing will ruin a lot in the game...
Now, the mothership... yeah it's cool, it can do that and that but why the fuck do they need a mothership if they already made new carriers! I really don't like super units and shit it just kills the balance and makes it easier for noobs.
Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years. I'm not really into playing just micro in sc2, there are a lot of UMS's for that. It's fucking annoying to know that i've busted my back so long to get a decent multitasking and macro and now blizzard just doesn't give a shit on that, so i'll just select my 200 gates and mass zeals for the win. And auto-mining sucks too, because it makes the game "easier".
I love StarCraft and play it for so many years because it's a constant challenge, i always need to pay attention to my expo ( no automining), to my unit production and my units, not just select 200/200 units and order attack to enemy base.
I feel like I'm maybe overreacting but I just don't like how things are evolving for sc2 atm.
edit: edited my post so it can be easier to read...
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years.
do you really think they could make everyone happy? lol
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
I agree with others about the noob-friendly interface being bad for sc2. Do any of you really want to play a game you can master in a few monthes? Sure, some people will still have better macro/micro than others, but it couldn't be too far ahead. What else can you be doing other than macro/micro? It looks to me like players would be spending the entire time sitting and watching units fight.
As for the mothership, I think if it is overly powerful OR more or less useless like a scout it would be bad either way. What does SC have that is unviable? A few increase mana spells and the scout, that's it. Having too many useless units would make it just like a C&C game in which there are only 2 or 3 units worth buying in any situation.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: I really don't like how Blizzard managed to ruin StarCraft II. Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games. And i just hate how they try do make things "easier". We're not retards, i love BW because of the things that make it harder, like having to select each gate/fact/hatch etc to produce units.The fact that only zerg could produce 12 units at once was giving balance to the game, having all the races do that shit only ruins it. Oh, and unlimited unit selection is crap too. If I wanna select 1234554355 units at once i use a hack, but i don't want to! This thing will ruin a lot in the game... Now, the mothership... yeah it's cool, it can do that and that but why the fuck do they need a mothership if they already made new carriers! I really don't like super units and shit it just kills the balance and makes it easier for noobs. Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years. I'm not really into playing just micro in sc2, there are a lot of UMS's for that. It's fucking annoying to know that i've busted my back so long to get a decent multitasking and macro and now blizzard just doesn't give a shit on that, so i'll just select my 200 gates and mass zeals for the win. And auto-mining sucks too, because it makes the game "easier". I love StarCraft and play it for so many years because it's a constant challenge, i always need to pay attention to my expo ( no automining), to my unit production and my units, not just select 200/200 units and order attack to enemy base. I feel like I'm maybe overreacting but I just don't like how things are evolving for sc2 atm.
Gtfo. If you're going to be a whining cunt at least make the post readable by interspacing. I read the first 2 sentences, look at the rest and knew its not worth reading for both reasons.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
Yes you are.
Wtf aphelion ? If there's something u wanna say just say it or stfu.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years.
do you really think they could make everyone happy? lol
No. I just want them to make starcraft players happy. They could make game with outstanding graphics, a easy gameplay and a noob-friendly interface which will attract a lot of players for those reasons and that will be played for 1-2 years OR they can make a game with an outstanding gameplay, that will follow the same strory and will have the same pace with BroodWar that will last as much or maybe more than it.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
Yes you are.
Wtf aphelion ? If there's something u wanna say just say it or stfu.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years.
do you really think they could make everyone happy? lol
No. I just want them to make starcraft players happy. They could make game with outstanding graphics, a easy gameplay and a noob-friendly interface which will attract a lot of players for those reasons and that will be played for 1-2 years OR they can make a game with an outstanding gameplay, that will follow the same strory and will have the same pace with BroodWar that will last as much or maybe more than it.
Who says they aren't doing both? Or the latter?
And why be shit, he just called you a retard so I think he pretty much said what he wanted to say.
lots of pro rts types are fairly viable and infrequently considered i think, like being hugely spread out over the map with 10 expansions each in the ultimate war of wide-scale game management; a crazy blitz-like game with rediculously fast unit speeds on a small two-sided map, lasting like 8 minutes average or something, sort of like pingpong; or a game where the units move slugglishly as hell but the strategy is deep, with a huge unit variety and 5 or 6 unique races. and the game takes a good pace instead of by an enormous array of multitasking or the extatic speed of a relatively small number of things that are happening, by the extra skill and effort it takes to work the ui, and the extra room for perfection there is for every action and decision, half way to being turn-based. I think to anyone who's not a hypocrite and holds an open mind to the fact that a game doesn't have to be exactly like broodwar to be good, such wide-ranged rts ideas are quite viable for a real e-sport. i believe they could be good but i still wouldn't play them, and if i did i wouldn't want to play them more than i do broodwar. just because they're different. broodwar is another kind of rts which has a pretty big number of good viable unique quallities modern rts games lack. Some of you seem to have like two or three beefs with bw, and are willing to exchange the entire game, for something that's balanced, played on a professional level, and is part of the same franchise, completely different in every other way, so that these couple quallities can be removed. so far they've replaced or reduxed every single unit in the game as well as ass-fucking the ui system. maybe you just don't like broodwar's specific aspects as much as you like its basic quallities that make it a decent spectator sport, as much as i do. They don't like the risk of making new promotions for an old product -- or maybe it's aesthetically displeasing to them because they like putting their heart into new projects. but i think it could work. unfortunately i at this point dont' have great faith in sc2 not to replace bw at least outside of korea. maybe it will be a stepping stone for esports and bw can come back or something like it.
just because the game is in early stages doesn't mean we should remain quiet or completely unemotional about any huge mistake we think they're making.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
Yes you are.
Wtf aphelion ? If there's something u wanna say just say it or stfu.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Don't understand me wrong I'm really waiting for StarCraft 2 but from what i see i'm not gonna like it. I really don't care if Blizzard wants to attract all the motherfucking gamers in the world into buying sc2, because it might not get me satisfied. I mean that the game should be liked by all the community, especially because there still is a community after 10 years.
do you really think they could make everyone happy? lol
No. I just want them to make starcraft players happy. They could make game with outstanding graphics, a easy gameplay and a noob-friendly interface which will attract a lot of players for those reasons and that will be played for 1-2 years OR they can make a game with an outstanding gameplay, that will follow the same strory and will have the same pace with BroodWar that will last as much or maybe more than it.
Yes!!! You're completely right!!! USEFULL INTERFACE = BAD GAME!!! CRAPPY INTERFACE = GOOD GAME!!! RETARDED INTERFACE = AWESOME GAME!!! Now go play Dune, where you can't even select more than one unit at once, that must the best game ever and will be played even 100 years in the future!
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: Multiple building selection is bullshit. This was the only thing that separated StarCraft from other meaningless RTS games..... We're not retards.....
Yes you are.
Wtf aphelion ? If there's something u wanna say just say it or stfu.
I obviously mean that you an absolute imbecile without an ounce of common sense, and that you should STFU unless you have something that is not absolutely retarded to say.
On June 19 2007 14:15 zobz wrote: lots of pro rts types are fairly viable and infrequently considered i think, like being hugely spread out over the map with 10 expansions each in the ultimate war of wide-scale game management; a crazy blitz-like game with rediculously fast unit speeds on a small two-sided map, lasting like 8 minutes average or something, sort of like pingpong; or a game where the units move slugglishly as hell but the strategy is deep, with a huge unit variety and 5 or 6 unique races. and the game takes a good pace instead of by an enormous array of multitasking or the extatic speed of a relatively small number of things that are happening, by the extra skill and effort it takes to work the ui, and the extra room for perfection there is for every action and decision, half way to being turn-based. I think to anyone who's not a hypocrite and holds an open mind to the fact that a game doesn't have to be exactly like broodwar to be good, such wide-ranged rts ideas are quite viable for a real e-sport. i believe they could be good but i still wouldn't play them, and if i did i wouldn't want to play them more than i do broodwar. just because they're different. broodwar is another kind of rts which has a pretty big number of good viable unique quallities modern rts games lack. Some of you seem to have like two or three beefs with bw, and are willing to exchange the entire game, for something that's balanced, played on a professional level, and is part of the same franchise, completely different in every other way, so that these couple quallities can be removed. so far they've replaced or reduxed every single unit in the game as well as ass-fucking the ui system. maybe you just don't like broodwar's specific aspects as much as you like its basic quallities that make it a decent spectator sport, as much as i do. They don't like the risk of making new promotions for an old product -- or maybe it's aesthetically displeasing to them because they like putting their heart into new projects. but i think it could work. unfortunately i at this point dont' have great faith in sc2 not to replace bw at least outside of korea. maybe it will be a stepping stone for esports and bw can come back or something like it.
just because the game is in early stages doesn't mean we should remain quiet or completely unemotional about any huge mistake we think they're making.
Interspace the text or noone will read it, just a tip I made like 6 posts up for someone else as well.
Starcraft isn't about pushing lots of buttons fast. If you want that, go learn piano; at least you'll sound good playing it unlike you do here bitching at tl.net.
The way I see it is that there will be many ways to hit places from behind, if a zerg nydus worms x3 and kills all your warpgates, are you screwed? maybe. Toss will probably just spread them out everywhere and then just warp units wherever. Do you want to try macroing 7 different gateways like that? No.
The game should be fast paced in its own right. By your argument you shouldn't even be able to hotkey more than 1 unit!! its SSSOOOOOOOOOOO easy to attack 10 groups of units a time.
I read all 5 pages of this thread and it pisses me of that some people whine about every little fucking detail. All this new info sounds promissing and non of it is final so Blizz will make it perfect during all the testing.
All this pre-release bitching reminds me of the bitching I saw before WoW patches. "OMG they are nerfing my mage spells". "OMG the new interface options blows".
Making the interface better does not make a game worst. The thing that makes a game competitive is the balance of the units and game mechanics. The thing that makes a game fun to play is the pace, variety of strategy (provided by good balance and mechanics) and a easy to use interface.
Auto-gathering is great, especially late game when you have 4 or 5 expos. And it will make it less painful for new players to get into the game.This doesn't ruin the micro economic management early game. Multiple building selection makes, for one thing, reinforcement rallying a whole lot easier, which is great. Still doesn't make producing the correct mix of units, at the right time, any easier.
And, "noob friendly" features doesn't mean that the pros get shafted. The more people that play a game, the more quickly (in general) bugs and imbalances gets fixed.
WOW. I cant believe 4 questions could cause so much complaining. First of all, automine is nothing. it saves you like 1-2 seconds, of time to select and right click minerals, I dont see the problem.
Multiple building selection too, shouldnt be a problem. For zerg, I sometimes make the mistake of pressing ss when a hatch is selected, so I definitely wont be hot keying all buildings at once, but maybe 2 per hotkey, so i have more space for more unit hotkeys.
For protoss, if you select all your gateways and build all zealots, and 12 mutas unexpectedly decide they feel like raping your probes, not only will you have to wait for a zealot from each building to finish, but you now have to wait for whatever counter to those mutalisks you just purchased. by the time they come, the mutas have just about finished ur probes.
For unlimited unit selection, I still dont see what the problem is. Massing all your units without proper micro will cause WAY more losses versys any competent player, especially when using zerg, or any mass amount of units in general. hotkeying units seperately will allow focus firing vs important units VERY easy and fast compared to having to actually manually select those units in the middle of a battlefield. position your units, especially with units like zerglings would be much faster and more efficient if you could just press 3, and manually move that group into position, instead of having to select them manually.
Im not even gonna talk about the mothership, and really none of you can say anything about that unit either, considering the fact that its stats/effects arent final, AND youve seen almost NOTHING that the zerg or terran will have.
Considering how this game is pre-alpha, I wouldnt throw your temper tantrums just yet. Wait until changes to the game are less likely to happen, AFTER people have tested the game thoroughly.
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that's what a lot of people want.
I wouldn't go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that's what a lot of people want.
I wouldn't go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that's what a lot of people want.
I wouldn't go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
It's a NEW game and if you fucking want SC:BW, guess what... YOU ALREADY HAVE IT!
if u want ez mode rts game go play WC3. we have that already.
Seriously. we have enough carebear easy rts games out there. shiny graphics stupid game mechanics and dumbed down controls so evry retarded 10 yr old can play them without having to try and learn the game.
bye Starcraft ,the most skilldependend and stratetic game ever made.
hi Starcraft ,carebear warcraft3 in space made for 10 year olds.
this killed evrything for me. i HATE warcarft3 (campaign was decent.rest sucked).if the gameplay feels even only a bit like warcraft i will never ever touch it.
there are masses of all those standart crap rts games out there. if they want to be different they remember their roots and what people love(d) about starcraft. and not copy what other games already did and all have.
but well blizzard isnt the same company anymore. they are on the best way to be like EA.look at WoW. Blizz is now bigger then ever before. but they lost their soul.
On June 19 2007 10:11 FirstBorn wrote: No. I just want them to make starcraft players happy. They could make game with outstanding graphics, a easy gameplay and a noob-friendly interface which will attract a lot of players for those reasons and that will be played for 1-2 years OR they can make a game with an outstanding gameplay, that will follow the same strory and will have the same pace with BroodWar that will last as much or maybe more than it.
And I thought that StarCraft players will be happy when they'll get the possibility to lay their hands on a completely fresh game that picks up the storyline and perhaps the characters of it's predecessor why also adding some really nice and new features that will be great for both hardcore StarCraft players and all the new people that will get it.
I really should stay out of this topics... People that bash WC3 despite their complete lack of knowledge about it just make me very angry. And all this "almost SC pros" who claim that new UI features replacing this completely retarded and outdated SC UI are going to ruin the game make me really furious.
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn't it? blizzard isn't stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they've done so far or aim at will 'ruin' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that's what a lot of people want.
I wouldn't go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
It's a NEW game and if you fucking want SC:BW, guess what... YOU ALREADY HAVE IT!
if u want ez mode rts game go play WC3. we have that already.
Seriously. we have enough carebear easy rts games out there. shiny graphics stupid game mechanics and dumbed down controls so evry retarded 10 yr old can play them without having to try and learn the game.
bye Starcraft ,the most skilldependend and stratetic game ever made.
hi Starcraft ,carebear warcraft3 in space made for 10 year olds.
this killed evrything for me. i HATE warcarft3 (campaign was decent.rest sucked).if the gameplay feels even only a bit like warcraft i will never ever touch it.
there are masses of all those standart crap rts games out there. if they want to be different they remember their roots and what people love(d) about starcraft. and not copy what other games already did and all have.
but well blizzard isnt the same company anymore. they are on the best way to be like EA.look at WoW. Blizz is now bigger then ever before. but they lost their soul.
Yeah, you're a genious and completely right BAD UI = GOOD GAME, GOOD UI = War3... Why don't you play Dune then, there you can't even select more than one unit, why waste your time with the noob stacraft game, where you can select 12 times as much units... Damn retards.
None of us wants to be able to select only 1 unit or have no attack-move or any of that. It's more about finding a balance between "too hard" and "bearable". I hate things like unlimited selection. They are in every other modern RTS and it really ruins the game for me. What's important to me is to have it thoroughly balanced, every or a majority of the units and abilities to have some practical use (i.e. no Scout or Valkyrie), and the ability to beat noobs with superior apm smash alone.
According to you the core principles would be 12 unit selection and single building selection, not strategic depth, racial diversity, unit diversity within the race, encouragement of thinking creatively, multitasking or pace.
On June 20 2007 08:59 Doctorasul wrote: According to you the core principles would be 12 unit selection and single building selection, not strategic depth, racial diversity, unit diversity within the race, encouragement of thinking creatively, multitasking or pace.
Is that about right?
Don't forget:
1) strong unit counters where units die in an eyeblink if left unattended 2) a player can get to high tech units VERY fast if they feel like not building an army (whereupon they may get rushed into the ground) 3) the need to expand aggressively and defend multiple areas of the map at once
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
You mean microing?
But if you have your cc rallied on a mineral field, when you want an scv/probe/drone to build with and you don't pay attention when you build a new one, it'll go gather some minerals, so you'll have to either grab it as it's en route to the minerals or grab it after it's started mining which will waste your time.
So the retards will just hurt themselves using auto gathering, it'll also be easier to hit their economy with a dropoff if all their scv's being built run straight into your units and they have to choose a new rally.
no, if u wanna build something just get a worker from a min line.
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn\'t it? blizzard isn\'t stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they\'ve done so far or aim at will \'ruin\' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that\'s what a lot of people want.
I wouldn\'t go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
yes, and they are the same people that bitched when starcraft was coming out. the same ones that were blown away years later, realizing that change (especially in the hands of a company like blizzard) can be amazing.
i'm not saying sc2 is absolutely guaranteed to be good, but look at it this way. how else can you classify a group of conservative people who immediately dismiss and write off a game that they know:
1) cannot be accurately judged yet with the limited information released (only one race has been illustrated for god's sake - from broodwar you should realize at least that without an understanding of all races, the beauty and intricate balance of the game is gone. in other words, knowing one race is not the equivalent of knowing 1/3 of the game)
2) is in the hands of one of the most successful gaming companies in history, the one that created the game on which you spend hours playing and posting on forums about, the one that has proudly described its express desire to create a 'competitive, fast-paced game' that will not disappoint starcraft fans, and the one that has released fifteen patches regularly for a ten-year-old game, following closely korean progaming and fan complaints. you have to be either completely insulting, ignorant, or incredibly short-sighted to not have a pretty solid faith in blizzard.
warcraft, wow, diablo, bw - having so many resounding successes in a row is not a fluke, and is only a testament to the company's quality control.
3) has not even reached alpha testing yet, and is apt to change drastically at every step along the way.
look at hawk's post - fine, it is somewhat reasonable (but still close-minded) to want a game that is basically identical to broodwar - but to say that a game is 'ruined' because of easier mechanics? i have nothing against constructive criticism, like complaints of gaudy graphics or repetitive attack types, but his thought was plain stupid, and unfortunately extremely prevalent in this forum.
and what are you trying to say about my post history? it's not stellar, but i'm pretty damn sure it's not worse than yours. don't try to play that card, you are going to embarrass yourself.
On June 18 2007 12:55 intrigue wrote: the entire possibility of new mechanics or gameplay is lost on you guys, isn\'t it? blizzard isn\'t stupid, and by trivializing things that were so important in the original, they seem to be saying that there will be new things to think about, more strategy, more things to master and elements to discover.
stop complaining and give it a chance. what the fuck do you want, just another starcraft with fancier graphics? nothing they\'ve done so far or aim at will \'ruin\' the game.
god you guys are idiots =(
.....yes, that\'s what a lot of people want.
I wouldn\'t go about calling people idiots after some of the gems one can find in your post history...
yes, and they are the same people that bitched when starcraft was coming out. the same ones that were blown away years later, realizing that change (especially in the hands of a company like blizzard) can be amazing.
i'm not saying sc2 is absolutely guaranteed to be good, but look at it this way. how else can you classify a group of conservative people who immediately dismiss and write off a game that they know:
1) cannot be accurately judged yet with the limited information released (only one race has been illustrated for god's sake - from broodwar you should realize at least that without an understanding of all races, the beauty and intricate balance of the game is gone. in other words, knowing one race is not the equivalent of knowing 1/3 of the game)
2) is in the hands of one of the most successful gaming companies in history, the one that created the game on which you spend hours playing and posting on forums about, the one that has proudly described its express desire to create a 'competitive, fast-paced game' that will not disappoint starcraft fans, and the one that has released fifteen patches regularly for a ten-year-old game, following closely korean progaming and fan complaints. you have to be either completely insulting, ignorant, or incredibly short-sighted to not have a pretty solid faith in blizzard.
warcraft, wow, diablo, bw - having so many resounding successes in a row is not a fluke, and is only a testament to the company's quality control.
3) has not even reached alpha testing yet, and is apt to change drastically at every step along the way.
look at hawk's post - fine, it is somewhat reasonable (but still close-minded) to want a game that is basically identical to broodwar - but to say that a game is 'ruined' because of easier mechanics? i have nothing against constructive criticism, like complaints of gaudy graphics or repetitive attack types, but his thought was plain stupid, and unfortunately extremely prevalent in this forum.
and what are you trying to say about my post history? it's not stellar, but i'm pretty damn sure it's not worse than yours. don't try to play that card, you are going to embarrass yourself.
i dont think its close minded at all =p. i know its not even alpha, im not retarded. im just stating an opinion on what i see currently.
I don't get why everyones saying i want something identical to bw just because i think being able to bind all your gateways to one key is lame ._. i just think it really dumbs down macroing a whole lot. and i didnt even mention unit selection cap in this. but for the record, other threads i said id be fine seeing it betweem 24-50 or so. unlimited is just plain stupid.
yeah, youre still going to have to micro to be real efficent. but how much easier will it be to flank as a zerg? all you have to do it have a semi-circle around a blob and attack and half your work is cut out for you, there's so little timing involved. youll still ave to cast spells and what not, but flanking becomes 100x easier with this.
and i dont know why he's bitching about your post history =p
well yeah the way you put it now is a lot better compared to this
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).
unlimited unit selection means mouse users (a minority) will have an easier time and control groups can go towards more task oriented objectives like locking down 24 carriers, or other stuff.
Most bitching probably originates from people who have carved out a name for themselves using methods that will no longer be there. Fear that they will be unable to arise to new challenges and make a name for themselves in the new game. I say bring it on
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).
hahaha, i elaborated on the first page i think after i realized the flaming id catch for that. =p
like i said, its all just opinions based on observations. cant really give a solid opinion til beta is out. and god, i really cant wait to see the new zerg units
On June 20 2007 10:16 intrigue wrote: well yeah the way you put it now is a lot better compared to this
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).
hahaha, i elaborated on the first page i think after i realized the flaming id catch for that. =p
like i said, its all just opinions based on observations. cant really give a solid opinion til beta is out. and god, i really cant wait to see the new zerg units
Finally someone who actually learns on mistakes. Good job.
On June 20 2007 10:16 intrigue wrote: well yeah the way you put it now is a lot better compared to this
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).
hahaha, i elaborated on the first page i think after i realized the flaming id catch for that. =p
like i said, its all just opinions based on observations. cant really give a solid opinion til beta is out. and god, i really cant wait to see the new zerg units
Finally someone who actually learns on mistakes. Good job.
On June 20 2007 10:16 intrigue wrote: well yeah the way you put it now is a lot better compared to this
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
still, consider nydus worms, the protoss ability to warp in anywhere very quickly, and the units that transverse terrain. they all seem to point towards a game where speed is spent more on multitask and map-wide battles, instead of conventional ideas of simply microing, looking back, and macroing. it's pretty likely that any 'dumbing down' in an area will translate to a more challenging, evolved form of another aspect of the game (maybe even new aspects).
hahaha, i elaborated on the first page i think after i realized the flaming id catch for that. =p
like i said, its all just opinions based on observations. cant really give a solid opinion til beta is out. and god, i really cant wait to see the new zerg units
Finally someone who actually learns on mistakes. Good job.
i didnt make any mistakes. i just didnt elaborate becaue i didnt feel liek sharing my ideas yet
On June 19 2007 14:15 zobz wrote: lots of pro rts types are fairly viable and infrequently considered i think, like being hugely spread out over the map with 10 expansions each in the ultimate war of wide-scale game management; a crazy blitz-like game with rediculously fast unit speeds on a small two-sided map, lasting like 8 minutes average or something, sort of like pingpong; or a game where the units move slugglishly as hell but the strategy is deep, with a huge unit variety and 5 or 6 unique races. and the game takes a good pace instead of by an enormous array of multitasking or the extatic speed of a relatively small number of things that are happening, by the extra skill and effort it takes to work the ui, and the extra room for perfection there is for every action and decision, half way to being turn-based. I think to anyone who's not a hypocrite and holds an open mind to the fact that a game doesn't have to be exactly like broodwar to be good, such wide-ranged rts ideas are quite viable for a real e-sport. i believe they could be good but i still wouldn't play them, and if i did i wouldn't want to play them more than i do broodwar. just because they're different. broodwar is another kind of rts which has a pretty big number of good viable unique quallities modern rts games lack. Some of you seem to have like two or three beefs with bw, and are willing to exchange the entire game, for something that's balanced, played on a professional level, and is part of the same franchise, completely different in every other way, so that these couple quallities can be removed. so far they've replaced or reduxed every single unit in the game as well as ass-fucking the ui system. maybe you just don't like broodwar's specific aspects as much as you like its basic quallities that make it a decent spectator sport, as much as i do. They don't like the risk of making new promotions for an old product -- or maybe it's aesthetically displeasing to them because they like putting their heart into new projects. but i think it could work. unfortunately i at this point dont' have great faith in sc2 not to replace bw at least outside of korea. maybe it will be a stepping stone for esports and bw can come back or something like it.
just because the game is in early stages doesn't mean we should remain quiet or completely unemotional about any huge mistake we think they're making.
Interspace the text or noone will read it, just a tip I made like 6 posts up for someone else as well.
there's a paragraph format, you just have to give it a bit more than a glance. i sometiems don't want to work or change to avoid the trouble with people who are too ignorant not to let some trivial things effect them. imo it's not that hard to read. ....
If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
On June 19 2007 14:15 zobz wrote: lots of pro rts types are fairly viable and infrequently considered i think, like being hugely spread out over the map with 10 expansions each in the ultimate war of wide-scale game management; a crazy blitz-like game with rediculously fast unit speeds on a small two-sided map, lasting like 8 minutes average or something, sort of like pingpong; or a game where the units move slugglishly as hell but the strategy is deep, with a huge unit variety and 5 or 6 unique races. and the game takes a good pace instead of by an enormous array of multitasking or the extatic speed of a relatively small number of things that are happening, by the extra skill and effort it takes to work the ui, and the extra room for perfection there is for every action and decision, half way to being turn-based. I think to anyone who's not a hypocrite and holds an open mind to the fact that a game doesn't have to be exactly like broodwar to be good, such wide-ranged rts ideas are quite viable for a real e-sport. i believe they could be good but i still wouldn't play them, and if i did i wouldn't want to play them more than i do broodwar. just because they're different. broodwar is another kind of rts which has a pretty big number of good viable unique quallities modern rts games lack. Some of you seem to have like two or three beefs with bw, and are willing to exchange the entire game, for something that's balanced, played on a professional level, and is part of the same franchise, completely different in every other way, so that these couple quallities can be removed. so far they've replaced or reduxed every single unit in the game as well as ass-fucking the ui system. maybe you just don't like broodwar's specific aspects as much as you like its basic quallities that make it a decent spectator sport, as much as i do. They don't like the risk of making new promotions for an old product -- or maybe it's aesthetically displeasing to them because they like putting their heart into new projects. but i think it could work. unfortunately i at this point dont' have great faith in sc2 not to replace bw at least outside of korea. maybe it will be a stepping stone for esports and bw can come back or something like it.
just because the game is in early stages doesn't mean we should remain quiet or completely unemotional about any huge mistake we think they're making.
Interspace the text or noone will read it, just a tip I made like 6 posts up for someone else as well.
there's a paragraph format, you just have to give it a bit more than a glance. i sometiems don't want to work or change to avoid the trouble with people who are too ignorant not to let some trivial things effect them. imo it's not that hard to read. ....
yes, not wanting to struggle to keep his place within a block of dense, poorly formatted text makes him ignorant. there is no way to indent on this forum so just be considerate and space it, how hard can it be? to be honest i don't even read the poster's name when chunks like this come up =(
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Case in point. You say all that because you're a whining chobofucker.
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Post of the week, for sure! =))) I don't have a clue who Moon is, but that is almost art! Dude, please stop spitting and try to listen to what older and more intelligent people try to tell you.
This is pre-alpha. Blizzard is using progamers to test all the possibilites (including unit cap removed and unlimited selection) and will have plenty of time to work with all possible scenarios and choose the best one. Is this clear? Because if it is not, you won't last long here.
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Post of the week, for sure! =))) I don't have a clue who Moon is, but that is almost art! Dude, please stop spitting and try to listen to what older and more intelligent people try to tell you.
This is pre-alpha. Blizzard is using progamers to test all the possibilites (including unit cap removed and unlimited selection) and will have plenty of time to work with all possible scenarios and choose the best one. Is this clear? Because if it is not, you won't last long here.
Of course I know its in the pre alpha stages, I am not that stupid but I oppose anyone supporting and saying that these radical changes will make starcraft 2 as challenging or fun game as the original starcraft was. Honestly starcraft is fine the way it is, and if Blizzard keeps that then there is no trouble. New changes deos not mean good things.
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Post of the week, for sure! =))) I don't have a clue who Moon is, but that is almost art! Dude, please stop spitting and try to listen to what older and more intelligent people try to tell you.
This is pre-alpha. Blizzard is using progamers to test all the possibilites (including unit cap removed and unlimited selection) and will have plenty of time to work with all possible scenarios and choose the best one. Is this clear? Because if it is not, you won't last long here.
Of course I know its in the pre alpha stages, I am not that stupid but I oppose anyone supporting and saying that these radical changes will make starcraft 2 as challenging or fun game as the original starcraft was. Honestly starcraft is fine the way it is, and if Blizzard keeps that then there is no trouble. New changes deos not mean good things.
No changes also mean no chances on improvement. So stop being a cold feet peace of shit and shut up. You don't not get married because you're relationship is "just fine as it is and changes don't mean good things".
Want improvement? That requires changes, and as such, a chance at bad results as well. I believe along with any other non retarded hardcore Blizz fan that they are doing everything in their power to make this work and to live up to our expectations. There's always a chance things take a turn for the worse, but why insist on that? I'm alot happier to get hyped and look forward to this. I believe this will turn out to be just another gem in Blizz's gallery which will get me hooked and make me waste months of my life without a regret .
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Case in point. You say all that because you're a whining chobofucker.
and your a noobfucker because duffy actually knows what he's talking about
Creeping neutral creeps or rallying workers to mine = mindless and just a damn pain to do. Anyway, I would like to know what changes the conservatives want to see in StarCraft 2 besides better graphics?
I think it's ironic that you say rallying workers to mine is a pain to do when the real pain is sending them to mine after each individual worker is produced. It may be a menial task and yet another factor which separates the good and the great (with regards to multitasking), but not every task needs to be that irritating.
What most people need to realize is that there are certain RTS improvements which are going to happen because there's no reason for them not to happen other than to make the game artificially more difficult. Auto-mining workers is one such example.
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
Case in point. You say all that because you're a whining chobofucker.
and your a noobfucker because duffy actually knows what he's talking about
On a side note I think you should calm down and stop ranting in your posts, nobody will take you seriously if you write the way you do.
IE, saying 'stfu kids', calling everyone an idiot, randomly bashing some war3 player etc (I mean wtf, I don't really follow war3 but for a while moon was destroying everything so people thinking he's the best = logical).
I have to agree with the posters that think this is a good idea. IT WILL CHANGE THE WAY THE GAME IS PLAYED... That is not empirically a bad thing. So long as the game remains balanced, its fine. Those able will find more impressive strategies to work with. Who the fuck wants a strategical remake of vanilla or BW? Let the masters get a hold of the new game and flex their brains... The stepping/flying/jetpacking up/down cliffs will be much more important than whether or not rallying will cause units to auto mine....
Stop crying over every change Blizz makes. THE GAME WILL BE DIFFERENT. That does not mean that it will be worse. As long as they maintain proper balance... that is the only word of caution I would give blizzard (as though they need mine or your advice on any of this...). It wasnt the fact that you could or couldnt select multiple buildings that made SC great... It was the balance and lack of option IMO. There were only so many things that one could do... it ended up being very similar to chess
First off, I'd like to say that all the "anti-whiners" are just as bad as the people whining. If Blizzard listened to you exclusively we would have Warcraft IV: Orcs in Space. Blizzard isn't infallible or they wouldn't have to patch their games. Quit saying, "It will be good," and start asking if it really will be good.
I'm personally in favor of a lot of the new things mentioned. Unlimited unit selection doesn't bother me in the least, since in battles people will still be selecting small groups of units. Imagine throwing that huge zergling army at that little pack of archons with one click. Straight line of lings + couple archons = lolzerg. Unlimited unit selection will just make things a little less painful when you have 13 units to move into battle.
As for the mothership? It's a great idea. It strengthens the idea that the protoss rely on low numbers with lots of power and doesn't even really fit as a super unit. Simply the fact that only one race has it should be indication enough that it isn't going to be game-controlling, and its skillset only further enforces that. It seems less like a unit of destruction than a strong support unit. Look closely at its health in the demo video. That thing would've died 20 times over if not for it regenerating shields incredibly fast. Furthermore, look at its skillset in relation to the new units. Tempests have no shield against other air units. Is it a coincidence that the mothership happens to have an instant-kill anti air spell? The planet cracker forces the mothership to fly directly over the enemy units? How the hell is that useful unless... You distract the anti-air into traveling elsewhere then nail that unsuspecting pack of siege tanks! It seems that the mothership's purpose is not to win the game, but to shift battles in the Protoss' favor.
However, MBS still scares me. Badly. In Brood War macro serves to force players' attention away from the combat. Imagine a BW without that clicksink. See those 50 apm players deftly stopping every drop, cheese, and other form of harassment you attempt? Seems dull to me. Put simply, without the clicksink generated by macro, harassment becomes weaker and the game becomes more boring. Of course, there's no guarantee this will be the case. The way I see it there are two options.
Firstly, Blizzard could make MBS very simplistic, and this is the good option. Imagine in Brood War, you're protoss, you've got 1K minerals and 450 gas. You have 4 gates hotkeyed to #. You go #T to bust out those templar, then go to hit Z to make sure you don't waste that empty building. Now your production looks like this: 1: HT, Zeal. 2: HT, Zeal. 3: HT, Zeal. 4: Zeal. It's a pretty way to throw 300 minerals to nothing. The result is that MBS probably won't be used too much by decent players, since Toss and Terran will both run into this issue, and zerg has to be very conscious about larvae count. In this way, we're left with a system that *can* allow for easier macroing, but because of its weaknesses will still leave us rushing back to our bases, clicking through our buildings except in the most urgent of situations.
The other option is the one that scares me: Blizzard makes MBS perfectly streamlined. Now in the situation above you don't have wasted zeals hidden behind the HTs. Do this and that clicksink I was talking about before vanishes, along with the ability to exploit an opponent's inability to multitask. (On this note, I don't give a rat's ass about the addition of rallying to resources, it's a minor clicksink and not worth keeping, macro on the other hand is *the* clicksink) So, until we know how MBS is implemented, I'd say it's a pretty damn scary concept. If Blizzard makes it too good, SC2 will lose its largest clicksink and will become Orcs in Space without heroes. If the other option happens, then casuals will be happy with the UI and the clicksink will still largely remain for the rest of us.
On June 22 2007 23:54 LessThanThree wrote: First off, I'd like to say that all the "anti-whiners" are just as bad as the people whining. If Blizzard listened to you exclusively we would have Warcraft IV: Orcs in Space. Blizzard isn't infallible or they wouldn't have to patch their games. Quit saying, "It will be good," and start asking if it really will be good.
QFT
People should not complain "OMG SC2 is gonna suck" or act like SC2 all fine and perfect. They should ask themselves questions and try to answer the impact of the positive and negatives.
I remember people when people were whining about things like 3D, multi-selection, AMM, auto-gather, money maps, mass selection, and so on before SC2 was announced. In a business sense, it would be suicide not to include these features. With these features, beginners have a shorter time learning the basics while pros will still be pros.
Let's be honest about what the majority of people don't see in Starcraft. They don't see how deep the strategies are because they're busy playing money maps and like watching their large scale battles without much micro. We're the minority. They aren't hardcore players like us that plays ladder and can accept losing 15 game straight
Thankfully, Blizzard made SC2, at its core, a hardcore game then beginner features revolved around it.
On June 22 2007 23:54 LessThanThree wrote: First off, I'd like to say that all the "anti-whiners" are just as bad as the people whining. If Blizzard listened to you exclusively we would have Warcraft IV: Orcs in Space. Blizzard isn't infallible or they wouldn't have to patch their games. Quit saying, "It will be good," and start asking if it really will be good.
I'm personally in favor of a lot of the new things mentioned. Unlimited unit selection doesn't bother me in the least, since in battles people will still be selecting small groups of units. Imagine throwing that huge zergling army at that little pack of archons with one click. Straight line of lings + couple archons = lolzerg. Unlimited unit selection will just make things a little less painful when you have 13 units to move into battle.
As for the mothership? It's a great idea. It strengthens the idea that the protoss rely on low numbers with lots of power and doesn't even really fit as a super unit. Simply the fact that only one race has it should be indication enough that it isn't going to be game-controlling, and its skillset only further enforces that. It seems less like a unit of destruction than a strong support unit. Look closely at its health in the demo video. That thing would've died 20 times over if not for it regenerating shields incredibly fast. Furthermore, look at its skillset in relation to the new units. Tempests have no shield against other air units. Is it a coincidence that the mothership happens to have an instant-kill anti air spell? The planet cracker forces the mothership to fly directly over the enemy units? How the hell is that useful unless... You distract the anti-air into traveling elsewhere then nail that unsuspecting pack of siege tanks! It seems that the mothership's purpose is not to win the game, but to shift battles in the Protoss' favor.
However, MBS still scares me. Badly. In Brood War macro serves to force players' attention away from the combat. Imagine a BW without that clicksink. See those 50 apm players deftly stopping every drop, cheese, and other form of harassment you attempt? Seems dull to me. Put simply, without the clicksink generated by macro, harassment becomes weaker and the game becomes more boring. Of course, there's no guarantee this will be the case. The way I see it there are two options.
Firstly, Blizzard could make MBS very simplistic, and this is the good option. Imagine in Brood War, you're protoss, you've got 1K minerals and 450 gas. You have 4 gates hotkeyed to #. You go #T to bust out those templar, then go to hit Z to make sure you don't waste that empty building. Now your production looks like this: 1: HT, Zeal. 2: HT, Zeal. 3: HT, Zeal. 4: Zeal. It's a pretty way to throw 300 minerals to nothing. The result is that MBS probably won't be used too much by decent players, since Toss and Terran will both run into this issue, and zerg has to be very conscious about larvae count. In this way, we're left with a system that *can* allow for easier macroing, but because of its weaknesses will still leave us rushing back to our bases, clicking through our buildings except in the most urgent of situations.
The other option is the one that scares me: Blizzard makes MBS perfectly streamlined. Now in the situation above you don't have wasted zeals hidden behind the HTs. Do this and that clicksink I was talking about before vanishes, along with the ability to exploit an opponent's inability to multitask. (On this note, I don't give a rat's ass about the addition of rallying to resources, it's a minor clicksink and not worth keeping, macro on the other hand is *the* clicksink) So, until we know how MBS is implemented, I'd say it's a pretty damn scary concept. If Blizzard makes it too good, SC2 will lose its largest clicksink and will become Orcs in Space without heroes. If the other option happens, then casuals will be happy with the UI and the clicksink will still largely remain for the rest of us.
Just my 2 cents... Flame away... >.>
I think your basing this on the OLD protoss way of production.
On June 22 2007 12:09 phexac wrote: If you think that the lack of ability to select multiple buildings and an artificial limit imposed on unit selection is all the separates BW from other RTS and that the ability to best overcome these interface limitations is all that separates a good player from a newb, chances are you are a whining chobofucker.
Idiot, its what makes this game so classic, and challenging, chances your just some stupid wow nerd or warcraft player that wants to impose ideas suited to the noobass warcraft players, whom don't have even have a clue what a real challening game like starcraft should be. I can't believe Blizzard listens to idiots like you, idiots like you couldn't figure that Moon was not really the best war3 player in the world, and won because of circumstances, and that they were plenty of other players that could beat him; but because of chances, moon seemed so dominant but you being the idiot fanboy warcraft nerd that you are worshipped him as the best player in the world without having any idea at all. Your that fanboy, or you're just a stupid noob ass kid. STFU seriously, we don't want CNC, or warcraft in space with elf imbalance that ruins war3. People like you made elf imbalanced in war3. In conclusion just STFU kid.
I can't believe you guys are attacking the people who are complaining about things that they should. Blizzard decision to make unlimited unit selection and many other things, will only make starcraft look incompetent and an unworthy sucessor to broodwar. I say complain as much as possible, I would hate to see warcraft in space, or another CNC. Justin Browder should not have been chosen for this job. Being noob friendly is not an option, are you guys seriously noobs? I hope not, because the original features as someone already pointed out makes this game challenging, for competence. I don't think a pro like Nada will like this, seriously guys, have you been affected by the CNC-I want everything to be easy-EA strat games rock-support war3 fanboys to make starcraft 2 imbalanced with elf in space- attract 12 year old noobs and other ignorant idiots to Sc2 to make the community more stupid disease?
With the risk of repeating myself, GOOD UI = WAR3, BAD UI = GOOD GAME, RETARDED UI = AWESOME GAME, so Blizz should just make the most retarded game ever and you'll be happy, why doesn't Blizz listen, damn!
On June 22 2007 23:54 LessThanThree wrote: First off, I'd like to say that all the "anti-whiners" are just as bad as the people whining. If Blizzard listened to you exclusively we would have Warcraft IV: Orcs in Space. Blizzard isn't infallible or they wouldn't have to patch their games. Quit saying, "It will be good," and start asking if it really will be good.
I'm personally in favor of a lot of the new things mentioned. Unlimited unit selection doesn't bother me in the least, since in battles people will still be selecting small groups of units. Imagine throwing that huge zergling army at that little pack of archons with one click. Straight line of lings + couple archons = lolzerg. Unlimited unit selection will just make things a little less painful when you have 13 units to move into battle.
As for the mothership? It's a great idea. It strengthens the idea that the protoss rely on low numbers with lots of power and doesn't even really fit as a super unit. Simply the fact that only one race has it should be indication enough that it isn't going to be game-controlling, and its skillset only further enforces that. It seems less like a unit of destruction than a strong support unit. Look closely at its health in the demo video. That thing would've died 20 times over if not for it regenerating shields incredibly fast. Furthermore, look at its skillset in relation to the new units. Tempests have no shield against other air units. Is it a coincidence that the mothership happens to have an instant-kill anti air spell? The planet cracker forces the mothership to fly directly over the enemy units? How the hell is that useful unless... You distract the anti-air into traveling elsewhere then nail that unsuspecting pack of siege tanks! It seems that the mothership's purpose is not to win the game, but to shift battles in the Protoss' favor.
However, MBS still scares me. Badly. In Brood War macro serves to force players' attention away from the combat. Imagine a BW without that clicksink. See those 50 apm players deftly stopping every drop, cheese, and other form of harassment you attempt? Seems dull to me. Put simply, without the clicksink generated by macro, harassment becomes weaker and the game becomes more boring. Of course, there's no guarantee this will be the case. The way I see it there are two options.
Firstly, Blizzard could make MBS very simplistic, and this is the good option. Imagine in Brood War, you're protoss, you've got 1K minerals and 450 gas. You have 4 gates hotkeyed to #. You go #T to bust out those templar, then go to hit Z to make sure you don't waste that empty building. Now your production looks like this: 1: HT, Zeal. 2: HT, Zeal. 3: HT, Zeal. 4: Zeal. It's a pretty way to throw 300 minerals to nothing. The result is that MBS probably won't be used too much by decent players, since Toss and Terran will both run into this issue, and zerg has to be very conscious about larvae count. In this way, we're left with a system that *can* allow for easier macroing, but because of its weaknesses will still leave us rushing back to our bases, clicking through our buildings except in the most urgent of situations.
The other option is the one that scares me: Blizzard makes MBS perfectly streamlined. Now in the situation above you don't have wasted zeals hidden behind the HTs. Do this and that clicksink I was talking about before vanishes, along with the ability to exploit an opponent's inability to multitask. (On this note, I don't give a rat's ass about the addition of rallying to resources, it's a minor clicksink and not worth keeping, macro on the other hand is *the* clicksink) So, until we know how MBS is implemented, I'd say it's a pretty damn scary concept. If Blizzard makes it too good, SC2 will lose its largest clicksink and will become Orcs in Space without heroes. If the other option happens, then casuals will be happy with the UI and the clicksink will still largely remain for the rest of us.
Just my 2 cents... Flame away... >.>
I think your basing this on the OLD protoss way of production.
yeap in SC2 to build 6 templ and 4 zeal u have to click 6 times T and 4 times Z... it's easy then 4z5z6z7z8t9t0t (or selectgateZselectgateZselectgateZ etc) but it's not WC3 style where u click Z and all gate build zealot... PS and with warp gate upgrade u get same but reversed ZselectZselectZselectZselect etc.
To everyone who's concerned about the macro/micro being easier for players, how about Starcraft 2 has a pointlessly terrible interface, so you can only select one unit at a time? That would require much more APM, which obviously means it would be a more fun and challenging game.
On June 26 2007 01:26 EscPlan9 wrote: To everyone who's concerned about the macro/micro being easier for players, how about Starcraft 2 has a pointlessly terrible interface, so you can only select one unit at a time? That would require much more APM, which obviously means it would be a more fun and challenging game.
[/sarcasm]
Totally agree, best idea ever! You should also have to press the hotkey 5 times to produce a unit, that would truly make STARCRAFT 2 GREAT(for retards).
On June 26 2007 01:26 EscPlan9 wrote: To everyone who's concerned about the macro/micro being easier for players, how about Starcraft 2 has a pointlessly terrible interface, so you can only select one unit at a time? That would require much more APM, which obviously means it would be a more fun and challenging game.
[/sarcasm]
Totally agree, best idea ever! You should also have to press the hotkey 5 times to produce a unit, that would truly make STARCRAFT 2 GREAT(for retards).
HAI GUYS, ANYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH LOLOLOL IN THE SLIGHTEST MUST CLEARLY BE A ReTARD!!! GOD FORBID YOU GIVE YOUR IMPUT ON WHAT YOU SEE!!!
every post you make in the sc2 thread is flaming someone for having an opinion different than your own. its almost as annoying as that idiot dendra. seriously, calm the fuck down and shut up if youre going to flame instead of discuss.
MBS and unlimited select won't make for an easier game, on the contrary it will make the games "mundane" tasks much more complicated and demand more game experience to handle. And this is something I personally never wanted from sc2. A big part of the reason (i think) why sc became a sport is because it is so fucking easy to play that even 12 year old fan girls that have played 20 games total still can appreciate pro matches.
I think this is the beuty of bw, easy easy rules, and still downright impossible to master. And I for one am sad to see this go.
quote: However, MBS still scares me. Badly. In Brood War macro serves to force players' attention away from the combat. Imagine a BW without that clicksink. See those 50 apm players deftly stopping every drop, cheese, and other form of harassment you attempt? Seems dull to me. Put simply, without the clicksink generated by macro, harassment becomes weaker and the game becomes more boring. Of course, there's no guarantee this will be the case. The way I see it there are two options. ------- end quote
I have to disagree here, at least partly. I find aggressiveness and harass play easier whenever less effort is needed to manage your base/build units. I mean, when a zerg is spending a lot of time with muta harass, it is obviously the easier larva-based unit production (with a low hatch count) that make it possible to harass almost nonstop for a couple(?) of minutes at a time with mutas in early or mid game.
If you had to go back to your base and build from 15 zerg-gateways, guess how far you'll get with Muta harass? Nowhere. Which is why late game harass is more often than not, a half hearted attempt at harass... and is usually more sloppily executed and more often than not relies on the enemy not noticing the initial harass- dark temps with free drone kills or a drop in a worker line a second after a frontal force engagement. And/Or it relies on units that need no actual micro to do their thing. Drop 8 marines, stim, and forget. Check for cloak detection, drop 2 dark temps and forget. There could be so much more done offensively late game, if there were more time to do it (on fastest game speed).
MBS is one way to allow late game micro to be at least somewhat more doable, as opposed to a less micro/more sloppy harass situation. MBS could have it's problems, but the good is outweighing the bad for me at least in theory. There are exceptions of course, but only when you are forced to spend more than a second or two harassing late game. With MBS, you can harass more cleanly and still build back at your base... is the way I see it.
On June 26 2007 11:06 KlaCkoN wrote: MBS and unlimited select won't make for an easier game, on the contrary it will make the games "mundane" tasks much more complicated and demand more game experience to handle. And this is something I personally never wanted from sc2. A big part of the reason (i think) why sc became a sport is because it is so fucking easy to play that even 12 year old fan girls that have played 20 games total still can appreciate pro matches.
I think this is the beuty of bw, easy easy rules, and still downright impossible to master. And I for one am sad to see this go.
I think I see where you are coming from, but I still think MBS is intended to (and will) make some of the mundane tasks easier. Basically, if it's a Repetitive thing that the computer can do better than the player most of the time, then that's something the UI may need to address.
It's the complex decision making and micro, for me, that make starcraft so cool. There are a million other things that help the experience, but those are probably the biggest two for me. I think it's those two things that create the diversity amongst the strict rules that keeps the game challenging and fun for a decade. Those are also the biggest two things I like to watch done well by progamers. I think it's those two things that make Nal_rA and Boxer very fun to watch and popular. When things stagnate and the same strats are used over and over, and safe turtle->macro, non-aggressive play is the best answer 95% of the time... well it starts to get boring to play and watch. Why else do so many people complain about TvT lately?
Seriously though. Wouldn't you like to see the amount of detail in early game harass still used later in the game? The only way to allow this at fastest game speed is to allow players options on spending less time on their base management.
And obviously Blizzard isn't all about killing the complexities of training your units... I don't want a computer making decisions for me on what ratio of units I want to build, or where to rally, or exactly when to build a unit. I don't want the computer to think it's smarter than me at StarCraft, because I'll be damned if it is. I still hate MS word to this day because of all the automatic stuff they put in there... every time I install it I have to spend ages turning all the auto stuff off. No, I like the way I do things, and that's that. But MBS to me isn't taking away from that. Obviously when I want to be very specific and careful in how I build my units, I will address each building very carefully. But in a 30 minute game with near max units, I would rather be spending more time on the battles without auto-losing b/c I overdid my micro by 5 seconds per battle as opposed to spending most of my time on my factories.
This brings me to a topic I've been wanting to make a new post about regarding the latest trends in SC progaming. It's related to why Terran high APM players are so centered around late game macro games (compare this to early days of Boxer micro), why high level Protoss players are less often seen, and why zerg styles differ so greatly between some high level players. Basically, if MBS was implemented in SC1, I see Boxer and JulyZerg rising in win/loss ratio and OOV showing us more micro skills and more harass in his games. I see more Protoss high level players emerge, and less high templar dying from control group attack moves (man I REALLY hate seeing pros throw their Templars away for no reason). Some of this is based on word of mouth, as I only recently (this year) started watching the progamers heavily... but is a interesting topic regardless.
Look for this post, hopefully today, in the strat? section.
On June 26 2007 01:26 EscPlan9 wrote: To everyone who's concerned about the macro/micro being easier for players, how about Starcraft 2 has a pointlessly terrible interface, so you can only select one unit at a time? That would require much more APM, which obviously means it would be a more fun and challenging game.
[/sarcasm]
Totally agree, best idea ever! You should also have to press the hotkey 5 times to produce a unit, that would truly make STARCRAFT 2 GREAT(for retards).
HAI GUYS, ANYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH LOLOLOL IN THE SLIGHTEST MUST CLEARLY BE A ReTARD!!! GOD FORBID YOU GIVE YOUR IMPUT ON WHAT YOU SEE!!!
every post you make in the sc2 thread is flaming someone for having an opinion different than your own. its almost as annoying as that idiot dendra. seriously, calm the fuck down and shut up if youre going to flame instead of discuss.
LOL, a retard got offended, how suprising! And now he follows me in the threads I post and tries to flame me... ROFL... it's damn obvious you're the one that needs to calm down and stfu, you're not discussing anything in any of your posts or back up yourself with anything reasonable, you're just whining like the little crybaby you are. Another funny thing is that you post the same crap as Dendra and you're trying to insult me that I'm like him, ROFL. "GOD FORBID PEOPLE POST SOMETHING REASONABLE INSTEAD OF WHINING!"
WOW can you all STFU for a while? I think I hear your moms calling... must be diner time. FUCK. Its like a goddamn preschool class...
Just agree to disagree, go beat off to some hot Korean girl porn, and play some more video games. Im sick of peoples immature arguments. Totally nonconstructive.
Especially considering the fact that every single argument has been used so many times already. I cringe now every time I read someone posting something along the lines of: "If a good interface is bad, why not make a very bad interface [/sarcasm]". It's almost as if the people using that line of thought think it is actually a viable argument T_T.
On June 26 2007 01:26 EscPlan9 wrote: To everyone who's concerned about the macro/micro being easier for players, how about Starcraft 2 has a pointlessly terrible interface, so you can only select one unit at a time? That would require much more APM, which obviously means it would be a more fun and challenging game.
[/sarcasm]
Totally agree, best idea ever! You should also have to press the hotkey 5 times to produce a unit, that would truly make STARCRAFT 2 GREAT(for retards).
HAI GUYS, ANYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH LOLOLOL IN THE SLIGHTEST MUST CLEARLY BE A ReTARD!!! GOD FORBID YOU GIVE YOUR IMPUT ON WHAT YOU SEE!!!
every post you make in the sc2 thread is flaming someone for having an opinion different than your own. its almost as annoying as that idiot dendra. seriously, calm the fuck down and shut up if youre going to flame instead of discuss.
LOL, a retard got offended, how suprising! And now he follows me in the threads I post and tries to flame me... ROFL... it's damn obvious you're the one that needs to calm down and stfu, you're not discussing anything in any of your posts or back up yourself with anything reasonable, you're just whining like the little crybaby you are. Another funny thing is that you post the same crap as Dendra and you're trying to insult me that I'm like him, ROFL. "GOD FORBID PEOPLE POST SOMETHING REASONABLE INSTEAD OF WHINING!"
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
That was silly... Oov didn't get gosu macro because of fast hands. He's got them because of his amazing sense of timing. Same goes to savior. ~_____~ Seriously I'd like to see you be the nxt gosu, if it's a retard game.
Rly, all the easier interface will allow us to elevate to a higher playing field, like strategy rather than poinjtlessly tapping away at our keyboard, which I find extremely mundane and uncreative.
the changes seem logical enough, but at the same time macro is going to be flawless for the most part. you won't even have to worry about idle workers and creating alot of units will be done very easily and instantly. i think the difference is, at least with protoss, you can't queue units anymore so you still have to "time" when to make your stuff. it will be interesting to see how that actually plays out in real games.
You can' t queue units anymore? Where did you come up with that? The toss still have the gateway and building 5 zealots should queue them.... But maybe I've missed something and I'm completely wrong. But yeah I'm not a fan of the mothership nor the marines with shields and the jetpack men with cowboy pistols. Couldn't they give them some sort of laser glove? Bane lings look like those bad guys from some movie I saw where some creatures would roll and then once they went over somebody only their skeleton was left. I can't remember the movie though.....
On June 18 2007 12:22 Hawk wrote: Sweet, starcraft for retards -_-. Wave bye bye to macroing everyone
That was silly... Oov didn't get gosu macro because of fast hands. He's got them because of his amazing sense of timing. Same goes to savior. ~_____~ Seriously I'd like to see you be the nxt gosu, if it's a retard game.
I like the idea of unlimited unit selection so that you can basically put all of units of one kind into one group like all 30 siege tanks to hotkey number #2. And all 30 vultures to hotkey #1.
I think the biggest difference is fast hands. When it's obvious to everyone in the audience that the player wants more tanks and vultures, there isn't some brilliant timing or strategic genius going on that makes them faster than another player would get them, it's finger speed at keeping all of the SCVs and buildings doing what he wants. Playing high-level Starcraft is as physical a skill as playing a musical instrument.
All of the base management cleverness could be automated away. Every player from the noobest noob on up could have bases that run as smoothly and efficiently as Oov's. Just select your build-order and production priorities from a drop-down list, and let it follow your script. It doesn't take much in the way of AI to out-manage a human player, when APM is what matters.
It's a legitimate concern for people who want more Starcraft, and not just a good Starcraft-themed RTS. SC2 will undoubtedly be a good game, and lots of fun to play, it just might not play like Starcraft. Blizzard has proven they can make consistently good games, but not that they can consistently make games good for sport-like competition.
I know I'll be buying it and playing it. I don't know if I'll be watching pro VODs.
If, in your own games, your base always runs smoothly and you're never distracted by managing it, you're not going to be very impressed by people playing with a different configuration that gives them poorer control.
When you play and it feels like you're supervising a short-bus field trip you develop an appreciation for watching a game where all of the units seem to be acting intelligently.
On June 26 2007 14:08 Sr18 wrote: Especially considering the fact that every single argument has been used so many times already. I cringe now every time I read someone posting something along the lines of: "If a good interface is bad, why not make a very bad interface [/sarcasm]". It's almost as if the people using that line of thought think it is actually a viable argument T_T.
QFMFT
it seems like at least half the arguments (including those using sarcasm) here are based on this retarded notion that because sc utilizes some specific system, somehow adjusting this in some irrelevant aspect correlates with the quality of the game.
i'm just afraid that blizzard is slowly closing the gap between higher and lower level players. if your sc macro can be labeled as 1 - 10, all this automation in sc2 closes the range to, say, 8 - 10. when macro becomes such a huge factor, microing becomes nearly pointless, and luck will have a hand in determining the battle. when you throw huge, equal armies at each other, how do you know who wins? i'm assuming a lot of things, but i think the point is still there.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://www.battle.net/images-new/portraits/bliz/Karune.gif)
.
