|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 09 2008 12:21 garmule2 wrote:
New engine. No matter what Blizzard says, you and I all know that SC2, Diablo 3, WoW, and WC3 were all just modified from the same glows-too-much cartoonish-looking ooh-its-like-WoW-it-must-be-awesome engine that the lazy programmers over at Blizzard have been using for years. These aren't the same guys that produced the real gems from Blizzard's past. It shows.
This is such a pointless complaint tho - the engine will NOT change, we are literally a few months away from beta.
Like, in what way is this a minor complaint? You are basically saying "scratch EVERYTHING, make a new engine".
Anyway, personally I think the game *looks* great, not to mention that so far, everyone I've heard from who went to blizzcon or other such events has said the graphics are great. I'm not really worried.
|
Wings and shields. WINGS AND SHIELDS. WINGS AND SHIELDS!!!!!!
|
Another minor complaint, I want the original Jim Raynor voiceactor back!
Will never forget what he said
"Howdy boys and girls, I am Jim Raynor, Marshall of these parts." I love him.
|
On November 10 2008 06:25 PliX wrote:
Another minor complaint, I want the original Jim Raynor voiceactor back!
Will never forget what he said
"Howdy boys and girls, I am Jim Raynor, Marshall of these parts." I love him.
Agreed...I don't like the new Raynor at all.
|
On November 05 2008 02:12 sushiman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2008 21:05 DeCoup wrote:On November 04 2008 19:48 sushiman wrote:On November 04 2008 12:27 onepost wrote:On November 04 2008 05:10 sushiman wrote:
Autosurround. I think alot of people will agree on that one.
I don't. Besides, it can't really be removed because there is no such thing as autosurround; it's the result of improved pathfinding. In BW, the pathfinding was for individual units, and it was such a crappy heuristic (wander around obstacles at random, increase search depth incrementally if that doesn't work) that it hardly deserved to be called pathfinding. But in SC2, the game uses cooperating pathfinding (managing one solution for multiple units, if you prefer), seamlessly managing collisions at chokes for example (you know, what made your tanks or dragoons disperse erratically if they bumped into each other at a narrow passage, sometimes without a single unit coming out?). Naturally, it makes large groups of units surround a common target or they would all bump into each other. There is no workaround. And frankly, I don't think there is a problem either. There is autosurround. Units will instantly form a perfect circle around a unit if they're given the order to attack it. This even applies to workers. Maybe you don't see it as a problem, but the fact is that this greatly reduces skills required to micro. You no longer have to be careful with flanking or split up your lings to make that perfect surround of a unit; the computer will handle it for you. As it is, players will only be able to focus on defensive micro instead of both defense/offense as in original SC. It's dumbing down the game. Better pathfinding should be in the game, units reacting instantly to surround other units should not. No, onepost is right. There is no such thing as auto-surround. The units surrounding an enemy is a result of improved pathing. An attempt to get out from behind the guy infront of them so too can attack. Units being so stupid that they stand behind each other instead of moving so they can attack would be a stupid thing to maintain. If you were in a war and your captain told you to kill an enemy with a knife, you would not just stand their because your team mates are between you and the enemy. You would move around your friend to get to your enemy. It would be beyond stupid to break improved pathing to maintain this lack of feature. Improved pathing is one thing, units automatically surrounding is another. I have nothing against units knowing which route to take to a destination, I love the concept of not having to babysit my units due to some map having small passages or neutral buildings blocking the route, making the AI of the units break and forcing them to dance around. However, units automatically positioning themself to always attack units is an entirely different thing. If anything, they should just stop units from dancing around trying to reach the target. Instead they should wait in place until given order to move around or the unit in front moves/dies, then continue with the previous command, unless another one is given. If the units automatically find the best angle and moves around, I'd say the amount of micro required for your units would be reduced by at least 30-40%, which is not good for a game that have already streamlined macro immensely (which is another subject that won't be discussed here). I realize you might consider this a backward move when pathing can be improved so much, but I find this a huge concern in a game that should demand alot from a player and his/her control of the units.
[Emphasis added]
I know this is completely counterintuitive to anybody but a software developer familiar with pathfinding, but it really is the same thing. For the pathfinding algorithm, allied units are obstacles just like terrain and doodads, with the exception that allied units can move, hence make way for one another. The surrounding behavior is exactly that: allied units going around one another, or making way for one another, to reach the same target.
The consequence of this is that you have to choose between the old and the new behavior, without possible compromise; the pathfinding is cooperative or it isn't. What do you prefer then? Units surrounding targets, or bumping into each other and getting stuck at chokes? I definitely prefer the former, and I would maintain my choice even if I considered surround a bad thing, which I don't.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Meh, having not actually played it yet I don't know if it's actually a big deal or not, but if it is.. War3s pathfinding was fine, no? And they don't surround automatically, although probably more effeciently than in BW, so couldn't they just "break" their pathfinding slightly and have it be like that?
Btw, I'm not sure from your post, but say I put 2 zealots on my ramp and then try to move a 3rd past them - in the current SC2 build my 2 zealots will move out of the way without me doing anything (I'm assuming if I put hold position they wont.. at least if they know what's good for them ;p). Is this impossible to change without changing everything else?
Can't you program in exceptions somehow  ? (I know nothing about this stuff)
|
WC3 still has the "YOU FUCKING RETARDED UNIT STOP GOING THAT WAY" kind of feeling, but certainly far better than sc. Also as far as surrounds go, its not too hard because the units are much bigger...especially like..bears while as sc units..SEEM smaller(haven't played it yet either) oh and uhh come out with beta
|
On November 10 2008 14:19 FrozenArbiter wrote:Meh, having not actually played it yet I don't know if it's actually a big deal or not, but if it is.. War3s pathfinding was fine, no? And they don't surround automatically, although probably more effeciently than in BW, so couldn't they just "break" their pathfinding slightly and have it be like that? Btw, I'm not sure from your post, but say I put 2 zealots on my ramp and then try to move a 3rd past them - in the current SC2 build my 2 zealots will move out of the way without me doing anything (I'm assuming if I put hold position they wont.. at least if they know what's good for them ;p). Is this impossible to change without changing everything else? Can't you program in exceptions somehow ? (I know nothing about this stuff)
About the two zealots guarding the ramp: it seems possible. I'd more or less dictate the engine to not move if they're on stop or hold position. It might require some tweaking though, if you insist on stop, but hold position is easy.
WC3 pathfinding: Non-cooperative pathfinding might be adequate for WC3, but then it has many less units, and the maps are very different as well. If what I read about SC2 is correct, and it will have even larger armies than SC:BW, then it would be a disaster!
Auto-surround: It really is impossible. Every time I think of an heuristic to isolate those cases, it breaks something else. Like it or not, you'll have to live with it.
|
Auto-surround: It really is impossible. Every time I think of an heuristic to isolate those cases, it breaks something else. Like it or not, you'll have to live with it
or dont play this @##@
|
Honestly, Blizzard aren't what they used to be.
|
auto surround sounds like it favours zerg heavily and disadvantages T
|
On November 11 2008 07:48 PobTheCad wrote:
auto surround sounds like it favours zerg heavily and disadvantages T
Thats just a matter of balance. Give them less damage or health and the increased path-finding is not an advantage.
|
On November 10 2008 14:54 Alizee- wrote:
WC3 still has the "YOU FUCKING RETARDED UNIT STOP GOING THAT WAY" kind of feeling,
I can't tell you how many times I've died in Dota because right clicking away from the enemies somehow makes me hero turn right into them T_T
|
On November 11 2008 08:23 GeneralStan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2008 14:54 Alizee- wrote:
WC3 still has the "YOU FUCKING RETARDED UNIT STOP GOING THAT WAY" kind of feeling,
I can't tell you how many times I've died in Dota because right clicking away from the enemies somehow makes me hero turn right into them T_T click close to ur hero because i find that if i click far away on the map my hero has retarded pathfinding
|
I am on a roll, you guys must be thinking I hate everything blizzard is up too, but honestly I am just soo much better at being negative than positive!
All books in the starcraft universe suck, they do not live up to the story made in the games itself, the books should be non-canon.
|
On November 11 2008 02:34 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2008 14:19 FrozenArbiter wrote:Meh, having not actually played it yet I don't know if it's actually a big deal or not, but if it is.. War3s pathfinding was fine, no? And they don't surround automatically, although probably more effeciently than in BW, so couldn't they just "break" their pathfinding slightly and have it be like that? Btw, I'm not sure from your post, but say I put 2 zealots on my ramp and then try to move a 3rd past them - in the current SC2 build my 2 zealots will move out of the way without me doing anything (I'm assuming if I put hold position they wont.. at least if they know what's good for them ;p). Is this impossible to change without changing everything else? Can't you program in exceptions somehow ? (I know nothing about this stuff) About the two zealots guarding the ramp: it seems possible. I'd more or less dictate the engine to not move if they're on stop or hold position. It might require some tweaking though, if you insist on stop, but hold position is easy. WC3 pathfinding: Non-cooperative pathfinding might be adequate for WC3, but then it has many less units, and the maps are very different as well. If what I read about SC2 is correct, and it will have even larger armies than SC:BW, then it would be a disaster! Auto-surround: It really is impossible. Every time I think of an heuristic to isolate those cases, it breaks something else. Like it or not, you'll have to live with it.
The thing with the zealots would be simple. As it is now, the engine creates the path not only from the unit being ordered to move, but it also tells other allied units to help out, pathing as a team. A simple fix would be, as you say, to just tell the engine not to mess with units on stop or hold.
As for the auto-surround: Yes, this is also possible to "fix". Of course you can make the pathfinder dumber, but it just seems so silly to me to do so. I believe modern games must find other ways to measure skill than by fighting the machine. Fix what already works because otherwise you'll never get anything better. Blizzard's challenge is to find the middle ground between the game being played in assembler and the game playing itself. I have faith that they can make an easy to learn, intuitive game that doesn't make me cry because my dragoons are steered by "special" protoss, but that is still impossible to master. Gaming joy without the chores of bending over backwards to make the computer understand what I want.
Edit: I also want the original Jim Raynor back. And I dun like teh medivac. Medics please, we still have roaches that can catfight forever (not even running out of mana) anyway.
|
On November 10 2008 06:25 PliX wrote:
Another minor complaint, I want the original Jim Raynor voiceactor back!
Will never forget what he said
"Howdy boys and girls, I am Jim Raynor, Marshall of these parts." I love him.
- yes i agree, i would be nice to have all the original voice actors back, but i think it might be to late =(.
- Update starcraft 2 website better please, as of now its kinda wasted space that looks really nice
|
Korea (South)3086 Posts
What's everyone's opinion on the new design of the Nomad? Kinda looks like a dark Arbiter.
|
Yeah, it does. It actually looks even better than the Arbiter. I love it! ^^
|
On November 08 2008 12:05 dcttr66 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2008 04:35 Savio wrote:
Make Roach Melee
Explanation:
The purpose of the roach is to absorb damage in lower mineral situations so other units can get the kills. However, their design runs completely counter to their purpose.
Please make the roach a melee unit. That way they can actually absorb damage that would have just killed the zerglings who currently run past the roaches to attack.
A units design should not nullify its purpose. The design should bolster/strengthen its purpose.
This is not a major change since the stats could be the same and the attack animation would be very easy to change. you're wrong. zerglings' worst enemies aren't melee units, they're ranged units. so the roaches will successfully draw the fire of ranged units
Your first statement is true. Zerglings are hurt by ranged units. But why would you say that roaches mixed with zerglings will draw the fire of ranged units? The zerglings will be closer to the enemy and targeted. Ultralisks are good at absorbing damage cause you can send them in with the lings but roaches will stand behind the lings and attack with their wimpy attack.
It is still a bad design for an attack absorbing unit.
Roaches will only successfully draw fire in the way you would like if they were part of an army with no melee units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
