|
On November 17 2008 07:47 Savio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2008 12:05 dcttr66 wrote: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.
You can move in the roaches just before the zerglings. And AI has a targetpriority. Ultras and mutas have targetpriority over lings. AFAIK. A unit keeps firing a the same target until its dead or out of range.
|
On November 17 2008 07:47 Savio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2008 12:05 dcttr66 wrote: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.
It is not an absorbing tank, having your enemy units focus on your roaches would make the regeneration ability worthless which means that it is more cost effective and space effective to tank with lings in that case and their attack ain't wimpy at all, they would almost win vs a zealot even if they did not have their regen ability.
They are not tanks, they are ranged units which can tank in some occasions due to their ability and nothing else.
|
sorry for the bump but this is the appropriate thread:
Whenever I see a VOD of SC2, player or observer, the movement of the screen has acceleration on it, much like many other modern RTSes. I HATE THIS. I REALLY REALLY HATE IT. And most modern RTSes conveniently do not provide an option to TURN IT THE FUCK OFF ASDFA. It would be really really nice if the game provided such an option because it's such a pain to deal with and honestly despite making it easier for newbies who have bad mouse control to control the viewport i don't make mistakes of that nature and i'm cool with it if the camera does not accelerate and works like sc or wc2 camera okay? I was watching starcraft 2 vods and i noticed it and i wanted to punch myself for not remembering and posting about it before.
|
Animations - shorter, or remove some of them
HP Bar - make it shorter
Xel'Naga towers - make them destroyable, but with high armor, so you need significant time and/or force to destroy them.
Limit the resolution - big resolution=smaller units; Could create problems for boardcasted games for example.
Redo the Colossus attack animation
Some units feel like they weight 10 tones, its like steering ancient ships, units should feel lighter, easier to control. Again this has to do with starting to move animation and/or actual responce times.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Bumping this because I just realized something that annoys me about WC3 bnet compared to SC bnet:
The lack of tab functionality!
In SC bnet you can just use the tab key to save you from having to repeatedly type in long ass ids when /w:ing >_<
|
In WC3 you can just /r. But I think they should implement a 'tab' system where you can open tabs for various people (I think AoE3 or RA3 has it).
|
In WoW you can use tab (I think that's the button) to scroll through previous whisperers; it should be in SC2.
|
I still think having different tabs for different conversations is better, and shouldn't be too hard to implement. It should be a standard by now, tbh.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
But the tab key works for any command in SC, /stats tab, /stats S.. tab, brings up slayers_boxer if he's in the channel etc.
|
On April 14 2009 00:28 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Bumping this because I just realized something that annoys me about WC3 bnet compared to SC bnet:
The lack of tab functionality!
In SC bnet you can just use the tab key to save you from having to repeatedly type in long ass ids when /w:ing >_<
WoW has a /r command that automatically responds to whoever whispered you last. I hope this is included as well.
|
On November 04 2008 04:22 rushz0rz wrote:
The Protoss voices seem too computerized- they don't have the conviction and malice.
This is probably my biggest minor complaint (if that makes any sense). I always imagined the Protoss race as really tall, advanced aliens who waged war with a mixture of their warriors and their machines. Now, it feels like mostly just machines, and a few warriors.
It's not easy to explain, but I'll try to do it anyway:
- The Stalker feels more like a machine than the Dragoon. With the Dragoon, you had a protoss warrior living inside this mechanical shell, sorta kinda like a bionic warrior; the stalker just looks like a robot.
- The reaver was unmistakably a machine, but at least its form and the sounds it made gave the impression of this big, cuddly machine of destruction. The colossus... it's just alien. A big robot.
- A protoss ground army with a few support air units could be very powerful and hard to stop in Starcraft; zealots, dragoons and templars with observers and arbiters for instance. In SC2, that doesn't seem to be the case- in Battle Report 1, the Terran's unit mix of Marauders, Hellions and Banshees couldn't be dealt with very well with just ground units, and the commentators correctly pointed out the Protoss should've made Warp Rays or Phoenix + Colossi. Making a bunch of air units (which have an unmistakable robotic feel to them) a standard part of the Protoss army only helps to make the protoss army as a whole feel less alive and more mechanized.
- The SC1 DT looked like a Ninja, with this psionic weapon he made himself. The Zer'atai Tribe DT looks... more armored, has this large crafted weapon, and its portrait looks like an armored bug. Again, the overall feeling is less of a crafty stealth warrior and more of a bulky, armored cyborg with a cloaking device. Less natural.
In general, the feeling of this technologically advanced warrior race with robotic support units was replaced by this race of robots that puzzlingly has zealots and high templar.
EDIT: In a scale that goes from 'This unit feels completely natural' to 'This unit feels completely robotic', a cyborg would be somewhere in the middle. Making sort-of-cyborgs look more like robots, and making very natural-looking units look more like cyborgs, makes the race generally feel more robotic.
|
On April 14 2009 04:05 Tsagacity wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2009 00:28 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Bumping this because I just realized something that annoys me about WC3 bnet compared to SC bnet:
The lack of tab functionality!
In SC bnet you can just use the tab key to save you from having to repeatedly type in long ass ids when /w:ing >_< WoW has a /r command that automatically responds to whoever whispered you last. I hope this is included as well.
they added this in 1.16 iirc
|
On November 04 2008 23:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:
First of all, if at some point unit pathing/AI becomes so good as to render micro obsolete, then it should DEFINITELY be broken, as it would defeat the point of playing.
I don't see how this could happen. Micromanagement goes beyond telling your units manually to not clutter up in front of the enemy, but rather for the ones in the back to go around and surround it; it involves choosing your battles carefully, retreating, harassing, telling wounded units to back off, using abilities at the right place at the right time.
Just like you can run away from Reaver scarabs in Starcraft, you can run from Hunter Seeker missiles in SC2; you could use Hold Position Lurker traps in Starcraft, you can create burrowed baneling traps in SC2; you could micro range upgraded dragoons vs. marines in Starcraft, and you can micro stalkers vs. roaches in SC2.
Most of the micromanagement in Starcraft cannot possibly be rendered obsolete through improved pathing.
|
This thread is hard to read. Sounds like massive crying by people who haven't even played.
And I know its labeled as such, but its still hard to fucking read. The surround complaint is especially stupid considering the majority of units are ranged, die super fast, are small, THERE ARE NO HEROES IN THIS GAME etc etc.
|
On April 14 2009 10:21 keV. wrote:
The surround complaint is especially stupid considering the majority of units are ranged, die super fast, are small, THERE ARE NO HEROES IN THIS GAME etc etc.
Sure there are! Just not in multiplayer. Thankfully.
|
Get rid of the Mothership if it is still available for use in multiplayer. It has no place and will upset the balance in a game that is oriented towards large scale, mass army type RTS.
|
On April 14 2009 12:10 bubblegumbo wrote:
Get rid of the Mothership if it is still available for use in multiplayer. It has no place and will upset the balance in a game that is oriented towards large scale, mass army type RTS.
Do you even know what the Mothership does? The only ability I'm more or less certain it still has, is a cloaking field- much like the Arbiter's in SC1, although it works on ground units and buildings apparantly. Why would you say it will upset the balance if the Arbiter doesn't in SC1?
Oh, the Mothership is also about as mighty and as expensive as a Battlecruiser, in terms of health and damage.
|
please turn this into a small complaints thread or change the name =]
|
On April 14 2009 09:41 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2008 04:22 rushz0rz wrote:
The Protoss voices seem too computerized- they don't have the conviction and malice. This is probably my biggest minor complaint (if that makes any sense). I always imagined the Protoss race as really tall, advanced aliens who waged war with a mixture of their warriors and their machines. Now, it feels like mostly just machines, and a few warriors. It's not easy to explain, but I'll try to do it anyway: - The Stalker feels more like a machine than the Dragoon. With the Dragoon, you had a protoss warrior living inside this mechanical shell, sorta kinda like a bionic warrior; the stalker just looks like a robot. - The reaver was unmistakably a machine, but at least its form and the sounds it made gave the impression of this big, cuddly machine of destruction. The colossus... it's just alien. A big robot. - A protoss ground army with a few support air units could be very powerful and hard to stop in Starcraft; zealots, dragoons and templars with observers and arbiters for instance. In SC2, that doesn't seem to be the case- in Battle Report 1, the Terran's unit mix of Marauders, Hellions and Banshees couldn't be dealt with very well with just ground units, and the commentators correctly pointed out the Protoss should've made Warp Rays or Phoenix + Colossi. Making a bunch of air units (which have an unmistakable robotic feel to them) a standard part of the Protoss army only helps to make the protoss army as a whole feel less alive and more mechanized. - The SC1 DT looked like a Ninja, with this psionic weapon he made himself. The Zer'atai Tribe DT looks... more armored, has this large crafted weapon, and its portrait looks like an armored bug. Again, the overall feeling is less of a crafty stealth warrior and more of a bulky, armored cyborg with a cloaking device. Less natural. In general, the feeling of this technologically advanced warrior race with robotic support units was replaced by this race of robots that puzzlingly has zealots and high templar. EDIT: In a scale that goes from 'This unit feels completely natural' to 'This unit feels completely robotic', a cyborg would be somewhere in the middle. Making sort-of-cyborgs look more like robots, and making very natural-looking units look more like cyborgs, makes the race generally feel more robotic.
I agree in as much as I liked the warriors supported by machines feel. It does fit with the lore well though. They are a dwindling race, what they lack in numbers they are trying to make up for with technology.
Wolf.
|
United States553 Posts
Just one minor coplaint for now :
-I hate those DarkTemplar sticks they use, and the way they attack....Please change the weapon and the attack animation, and make it more deadly-ish!
...I mean...those DT-s look like sissies, they are "petting" those probes with those ugly-ass sticks, nothing RAW about it.Reminds me of WC3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
