|
Starcraft ****ing Twoooooo (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
I think the patch came out today. |
yeah, logging into GPG and you get an instant patch, but since i dont have the net at home, i have to wait for a direct link :(:( just read some more release notes, and fvck this awesome game just got better. heaps of new gameplay options and general tightening up of current coding. definitely get back into it snail!! |
|
|
| CONNERMAN2000 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
well perhaps they should.
perhaps it was perfection 8 years ago, but times have changed and i for one expect more than just a shiny new engine. i want a simulation, not yet another hard-countered, instant-hit, rock paper scissors game. the power of modern machines is awesome, theres no excuse for taking the easy way out if at the same time you're not including anything remotely new from a gameplay perspective.
and i wish all you people would stop banging on about "perfect balance". frozen throne is perfectly balanced. whoopy do! its relatively easy to balance something when you use arbitrary rulesets to do so *yawns* such rulesets limit the tactical or strategic possibilities. ie "oh, i absolutely must build unit X because he is going to have unit Y". i hate games like that. at least in games like CoH there are multiple units to deal with other units. and supreme commander is unequalled when it comes to strategic depth and the way in which you can achieve your goals (especially so when this week's patch arrives!)
im sure starcraft 2 will please heaps of people, but we've been playing the 20 minute rush-styled game for almost a decade now, and i for one wanted to see a new direction with this classic IP. just another build-order-memory-exercise followed by a clickfest. again, thank god for supcom!! :) |
This is why Warcraft 3 got old to me way too fast. There were too few strategies that actually worked, so you basically played the same game every time you played. Warcraft 2 was FAR superior. If Warcraft 2 had heroes it'd be the ultimate RTS. |
|
|
| Marc Summers |
| quote: | Originally posted by CONNERMAN2000
This is why Warcraft 3 got old to me way too fast. There were too few strategies that actually worked, so you basically played the same game every time you played. Warcraft 2 was FAR superior. If Warcraft 2 had heroes it'd be the ultimate RTS. |
Are you kidding me? There are TONS of strategies for wc3. Have you tried towering? Have you tried massing ancient of wars? Have you done the Warden strategy with night elf, where you mass moon wells in your base and kill the enemy's army with just your hero? How about buying mercs? how about mass banshees and possess the enemies army?
If you think there are not enough strategies, you are sadly mistaken. Noob. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Marc Summers
Are you kidding me? There are TONS of strategies for wc3. Have you tried towering? Have you tried massing ancient of wars? Have you done the Warden strategy with night elf, where you mass moon wells in your base and kill the enemy's army with just your hero? How about buying mercs? how about mass banshees and possess the enemies army?
If you think there are not enough strategies, you are sadly mistaken. Noob. |
but its the same style every single time. build unit X to counter unit Y. that isnt strategy. play against orc, and 100% guarantee youre gonna be fighting off the blademaster. got really old for me really quickly. still an awesome game, but i dont see SC2 bringing anything notably different from FT in terms of gameplay mechanics.
long live supreme commander! :D |
|
|
| ASFSE |
ok so...
there is this game...called...chess, how long has it been around for? a long time, yes? and still popular today...
sc and wc3 are modern day forms of chess imo, for one, because they are very well balanced and there is clear logic in each and every action you take.
on the surface, it may seem that wc3 or sc are just games where you 'memorize build orders and do the same thing everytime', but that's only the tip of the iceberg...
when you reach a high level of play, you can start to deviate from the typical stuff, but whatever...
and also, wc and sc are games best played 1v1, team games are also fun tho.
EDIT: ok so didnt see someone else mention the chess metaphor before me...lol...:p |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ASFSE
ok so...
there is this game...called...chess, how long has it been around for? a long time, yes? and still popular today...
sc and wc3 are modern day forms of chess imo, for one, because they are very well balanced and there is clear logic in each and every action you take.
on the surface, it may seem that wc3 or sc are just games where you 'memorize build orders and do the same thing everytime', but that's only the tip of the iceberg...
when you reach a high level of play, you can start to deviate from the typical stuff, but whatever...
and also, wc and sc are games best played 1v1, team games are also fun tho.
EDIT: ok so didnt see someone else mention the chess metaphor before me...lol...:p |
oh yeah, i forgot! pawns do extra damage to knights whilst queens are forbidden from taking flying pieces but can take ground pieces because the game designers said so.
ie: BOLLOCKS. these games are nothing like chess. |
|
|
| ASFSE |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
oh yeah, i forgot! pawns do extra damage to knights whilst queens are forbidden from taking flying pieces but can take ground pieces because the game designers said so.
ie: BOLLOCKS. these games are nothing like chess. |
i said it's a modern day form of chess...so of course, there are gonna be some little modern advancments or else it would be a little boring.
can you elaborate and tell me why it isnt like chess?
chess, a game of anticipation and critical thinking, each choice you make decides the moments to follow.
pretty similiar to wc/sc...actually, pretty similar to life, lol.
and judging from your statement earlier about how "if you play agaisnt orc, there is 100% guarantee that they will go blademaster" i have the feeling that you didnt play the game very much. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ASFSE
i said it's a modern day form of chess...so of course, there are gonna be some little modern advancments or else it would be a little boring.
can you elaborate and tell me why it isnt like chess? |
well firstly, both sides are exactly the same. there are also no bonuses in chess to be memorised. there arent silly hard-countering rules- every chess piece has a role to perform, but isn't limited in what you perform against ie a (tier 1) pawn is perfectly capable of taking a (tier 3) queen in the right circumstance (all pieces are capable of attacking all other pieces). no piece gets a "bonus" against any other piece, or a negative. no fog of war. turn based versus real time. the list is almost endless ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by ASFSE
and judging from your statement earlier about how "if you play agaisnt orc, there is 100% guarantee that they will go blademaster" i have the feeling that you didnt play the game very much. |
i think youre the one that played very little online against good players. any good player with orc used the blademaster.
again, im not saying SC2 will be a bad game, just that there isn't anything remotely new in terms of gameplay to get excited about. been there, done that. its disappointing. |
|
|
| Surfmorworkless |
| Dear God i'm almost in tears!What's the release date!? |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
PKC, I understand entirely what's you're saying, in that strategy is very one-dimensional, because if your opponent attacks with unit x, your ONLY defence is with unit Y. This makes the game boring.
I'm not entirely sure I agree though.
Say a Protoss player decides to attack another Protoss player with a whole lot of carriers. The player being attacked could defend with:
1. Dragoons. Quite adept at taking down carriers if there are enough of them.
2. High Templars with psionic storm. Deadly.
3. Carriers
4. Scouts
So, that's four options right there.
However, using your teminology, you dislike "hard" counters, which in this case would probably be the Templars?
My opinion is that while hard counters can make a game a little bit one dimensional, they are also entirely necessary.
Firstly, if playing a Protoss player, you can never be sure if they are going to attack with a large fleet of carriers, a mass of dragoons, 4-5 dark archons, or any other combination of these. This ensures that you build several different unit types, so that you are defended against all kinds of attacks. If there were no hard counters, one unit type could be built to defend against anything and everything, and building different types would be pointless.
Secondly, if a particular type of unit does not have a weakness that can be countered, the game becomes even more boring because both players will always use this unit over weaker ones.
A good example of this was the heavy horse archer in the original Age Of Empires. It was fast, had a good range, could take some damage, and do a fair amount too. This meant that any good player would just build masses of horse archers, because there was nothing to directly defeat them, unlike catapults, which could be attacked by fast units that we able to dodge their missiles.
Applying this to starcraft, imagine that battle cruisers and carriers were not slow moving, the one weakness which allows ground and lighter air units to hunt them down and hurt them. Players would attack almost exclusively with these two units, then sail away before you had a chance to counter.
Or perhaps the Zerg Ultralisk could attack air units as well as ground units? What reason would you have to build anything else (besides the fact that they are expensive!).
Finally, if you think about real war, everything in real life has a counter too.
Tanks kill infantry, tanks are easily picked off by bombers. Bombers are slow, and are easily picked off by jets. Jets are easily killed by battleships, with heat-seeking missiles etc. Battleships are easily sunk by mines or submarines...everything has a weakness and therefore a counter.
One final note...the thing I have always hated about Starcraft is the ing terran ghosts and nukes. If you have a large base with 4-5 different spots that minerals are being mined, it's almost impossible to find that pesky red dot that tells you where the nuke is about to land before it blows up in your face. They should have increased the time delay on this I think. Maybe by another twenty seconds or so. |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
Actually, let me describe it another way using the chess analogy.
If Starcraft was like a game of chess, what reason would you have to make pawns? Everyone would just make Queens and the game would be boring as hell... |
|
|
| SuspicionVandit |
| if all the queens had HDR and ragdoll, i'd buy it |
|
|
|
|
