The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
HERE ARE A FEW POINTS, LOOK THEY ARE IN CAPS SO YOU DO NOT MISS THEM
PEOPLE POSTING FAKE NEWS WILL BE CONSIDERED AS TROLLING
PEOPLE POSTING ITSATRAP LINKS WILL BE CONSIDERED AS TROLLING
PEOPLE REPORTING PEOPLE FOR COMPLETELY INNOCUOUS THINGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER WILL HAVE THEIR REPORT BUTTON TAKEN AWAY
I HAVE NO PROBLEM LOCKING THIS THREAD AND FORCING EVERYBODY TO DISCUSS STARCRAFT 2 ELSEWHERE
IF YOU ACT LIKE CHILDREN THAT IS HOW YOU WILL BE TREATED
MY APOLOGIES TO THOSE WHO ARE NOT BEING DICKHEADS
3:00 - FMV sequence in a spaceship - looks Terran - zooming in on a metal door - door opening - reveals a guy with a cigar in chains - prisoner - door shuts behind him - there's so much bass the room is shaking - guy steps into some kind of metallic devicce - legs are strapped in - guy rising toward ceiling - Korean text on screen got people very excited - another part of the machine is dropping metal arms on him - machine whirring - applying armor to his torso - extremly detailed visuals here - now guy is strapping on gloves - armor is molding together - seems like a Terran marine - rockets turn on - zerg now onscreen - Marine delivers a line -
StarCraft 2 officially announced.
3:05 - Morheim says everyone eager to see actual game - going to show actual gameplay - bringing up SC2 lead designer. Dustin Browder.
3:07 - Showing gameplay footage - Looks like protoss ships - floating over asteroid/ base structure - entering protoss ase - similar looking buildings - vespene gas still in the game - character pane shows up on right side - some protoss guy - shifts to terran bases floating on rockets over same type of territory - sill collecting crystals as resources - marines load out. Dustin is actually playing the game - nothing in the game is final.
3:09 - controlling protoss zealots - still has psi blades and personal shield - new charge ability that let him quickly close range on enemies. Siege tanks shown - still the same type of behavior where they can lock down - take out zealots really quickly - new protoss unit - called immortals - have special shield that only activates upon being powerfully attacked - siege tanks could barely do any damage to them.
3:10 - Terran reapers - can hop across unever terrain with jump packs - two types of small pistols that don't activate immortals. Protoss now have the ability to create shields whereever they want. Protoss can now warp in units from manufacturing facilities anything within pylon range. New protoss unit - stalker - can teleport - quadripedal thing - can keep blinking forward - seems to be a shot cooldown on the ability. Zerg start coming in, giant worms pop out of ground unleasing zerglings. Protoss can use phase fields and teleporting abilities to create an army anywhere on the battlefield, according to Blizzard.
3:14 - Protoss colossus - huge unit that can blast out dual lasers and use long legs to traverse differences in terrain height - in the demo two of them obliterate about fifty or so zerglings.
3:15 - Zerglings can mutate into suicidal bomb things thar roll across the ground - very powerful explosions. Colossus using new IK system to move across differences in terraing height. Colossus extremley weak against air strike - New unit for protoss - Pheonix - can overcharge guns for multiple projectile blast - but after blast the ship is rendered inert for a short period.
3:16 - showing space platform environment, land mass floating over planets / nebulae. Showing phoenix units failing to destroy terran battle cruisers - new protoss unit - Warprey - flying unit that does increased damage the longer it hits a target with it's continuous blue laser.
3:18 - warprey also very effective against structures - very vulnerable to small unit fire - shws warpreys getting wiped out by terran marines. Physics system lets debris from warpreys roll down a ramp. Showing one more unit - warped in in a serious of cubes - giant floating base - called a protoss mothership - can only have 1 at a time - cost big resources - special abilities include timebomb that slows all enemy missiles inside - shows terran missle launcher shooting in projectiles that stop in the field before they reach the ship - when field ends missiles drop the ground - planet cracker attack - giant lasers stream from ship to ground - ship can be moved around while planet cracker laser is active - the ship looks like a metallic, triangular sand dollar - mothership can create a black hole anywhere it wannts to - creates distortion that actually sucks ships in and destroys them - in the demo the black hole destroyed four terran battle cruisers in about ten seconds.
3:23 - now showing terran and protoss fight - marines and zealots clashing on the ground - mothership and battle crusers in the air - framerate seems relatively stable as more units stream in - hard to tell - about 100 units on screen right now - a few of the new protoss units just came in - nuclear launch detected warning - every unit on screen destroyed - three nukes were launched at once - then zergs rush in and spell "GG" while turning into suicidal bombs.
Showing another video of "things to come." concept art for SC2 - zerg landscapes - ruined terran structures - freen filds - SC2 looks, at least visually, strikingly similar to SC1 - both in unit and map designs. Now showing a giant rush of zerglings - probably over 100 of them, swarming with no slowdown - mroe character art - finishes with the StarCraft II logo.
Still *very* early in on information, no screenshots or anything yet.
Actually never mind (thanks RayofAsh for finding these):
One of the most annoying things about Starcraft is the limit of twelve units to a group, especially if you're playing the Zerg, who rely on unruly swarms rather than, say, the Protoss' small groups of powerful crack troops.
hmmm
Deusfaux on
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
One of the most annoying things about Starcraft is the limit of twelve units to a group, especially if you're playing the Zerg, who rely on unruly swarms rather than, say, the Protoss' small groups of powerful crack troops.
hmmm
Yea? Well fuck those assholes. They SUCK.
G O S U on
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
Reposting the article, it deserves a thread life of more than 20 seconds.
Blizzard talks Starcraft II gameplay details
Blizzard Entertainment's top creative talent discusses Starcraft II gameplay details at a panel discussion at its Worldwide Invitational event.
By Andrew Park, GameSpot
SEOUL--Believe it or not, even though the Blizzard Worldwide Invitational 2007 event is home to music concerts and some of the biggest game tournaments in the world, one of the most intriguing activities is actually sitting quietly in a theater. Three of Blizzard's top creative talents, creative director Andy Chambers, senior game designer Dustin Browder, and vice president of game design Rob Pardo sit on a panel to discuss gameplay details for the company's newly announced sequel, Starcraft II.
Pardo begins the discussion by revisiting several of the studio's previous games, going back as far as Warcraft II, which the vice president cites as the first Blizzard game to garner a significant following as a competitive multiplayer game. Pardo explains that the original Starcraft arose from the team's desire to create a fast-paced real-time strategy game like Warcraft II, but in a different universe, then describes how Blizzard's subsequent RTS project, 2002's Warcraft III, took a very different approach by offering slower-paced gameplay with smaller armies, hero units, and many units with activatable abilities to appeal to "the average gamer." Pardo suggests that the units in both the original Starcraft, and in the sequel, will instead act as "movers and shooters"--mostly autonomous forces that generally lack special abilties, but will instead be used in large control groups to "do their own thing" in battle, rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play.
Pardo continues to contrast Warcraft III against Starcraft II, explaining that Warcraft III had less of an emphasis on economic buildup to allow more focus on battles. The 2002 game also, suggests the VP, was much less about early-game victories. While that game did introduce "creeps"--neutral creatures that could be fought to gain experience points for your hero units, early armies in Warcraft III were generally capable of only harrassing your enemies, not defeating them outright. Pardo suggests that "with Starcraft II, [Blizzard is] really going back to its roots to make a true sequel to Starcraft"--a sequel where resource management will be much more central to gameplay, with less micromanagement of different units with special abilities, and in which full-on early-game "rushing" (making an all-out assault at or near the beginning of a new game session) will be much more viable. In fact, the VP goes on to state that the game will probably offer more early "tech tree" optons--different development paths players can take by building different structures and researching different upgrades--which will make early-game scouting more important, and will make early-game rushing a more-diverse and deeper strategy.
Pardo also suggests that Warcraft III might have been a more-forgiving game for beginners--differences in skill levels seemed less pronounced in that game. Says the VP, in Starcraft II, there will be many more nuances that will separate highly skilled players from beginners, and good players from great ones. So in contrast to the sometimes-protracted matches of Warcraft III, Pardo expects the average Starcraft II multiplayer match to last about 20 minutes of real time; possibly even as little as 15 minutes when played by the pros. Pardo points out that there will be numerous subtleties added to the game that expert players will learn to use to their advantage, such as a revamped "high ground" system. In the previous Starcraft, ground units that had a height advantage by standing on high ground gained attack bonuses, but would also reveal themselves when attacking. In the sequel, units with high ground will still gain the attack bonuses but will remain concealed by the "fog of war" (the black shroud that covers unexplored areas)--a fact that can be used together with other line-of-sight nuances to your advantage.
Pardo ends his part of the talk by emphasizing that Blizzard remains committed to making the three factions distinct, and to making Starcraft II's gameplay true to the original game, but also different and new. For instance, the VP cites the new protoss units and abilities that have been shown--the ability to "warp-in" to different locations, and the powerful mothership unit. Says the VP, yes, Blizzard could have also looked to create a "terran version" and a "protoss version" of these new units and abilities, but the team did not. It is instead looking to balance the factions against each other while keeping them distinct. Pardo suggests that Starcraft II will, like the original game, still be a game about "hard counters"--such as how certain units can be directly "countered" (defeated decisively) by specific counter-units; as an example, Pardo shows a brief demonstration of protoss templar units, which are the counter-unit to zerglings, annihilating a swarm of the tiny zerg infantry with their "psi storm" ability. Says Pardo: "Yes, [Starcraft II] will stil be fast-paced and have 'multitasking' for resources and combat, but it'll be a very different game."
The floor is then given to game designer Dustin Browder, who uses his time to cite specific examples of different units in play. To begin with, Browder shows a demonstration of the protoss stalker, a ground-based unit that can attack both air and ground enemies and isn't all that tough, but can "blink" (warp in and out) to any location to which they have line of sight. The obvious uses of this handy ability include pursuing fleeing units by constantly "blinking in" in front of them, but they can also apparently be used as powerful base raiders by bypassing terrain barriers if you have an aerial scout, such as the protoss phoenix, to quickly get you line-of-sight beyond terrain obstacles. In addition, extremely skilled players will be able to defeat slower-moving melee enemies with stalkers by sticking and moving, repeatedly blinking in and out of range. The designer shows a demonstration of stalkers up against a group of protoss zealots, somewhat slow melee units that simply aren't able to close in for a hit as the stalkers keep blinking away and firing constantly, eventually winning the battle.
Browder shows how the new units and new abilties for existing units will help diversify gameplay and work within the counter-unit system. For instance, the protoss immortal, a ground-based tank unit, is extremely tough but slow (and can therefore be countered by quick-thinking players with enough resources to build up counter-units, and is also therefore not able to effectively flee from a losing battle), and possesses a powerful energy shield that is triggered only from heavy-duty fire. This makes the immortal a natural counter-unit for the terran siege tank, whose powerful cannons can't do much against the immortal's energy shield. However, the slow-moving immortals themselves can be easily countered by a large swarm of zerglings, which don't deal enough damage to trigger the immortals' shields, and are too quick for the tank to outrun.
Browder then shows an additional example of the kind of subtleties that will separate skilled players from unskilled players. The protoss phoenix, a flying unit, has a special "overload" ability that creates a damaging energy field around itself, then renders it immobile and helpless shortly afterward. Browder shows a simulated battle between a player with six phoenix units and another player with only four. The player with six phoenixes apparently chokes and uses the overload ability too early, allowing the other player to dodge out of harm's way, then arrange the four phoenixes around the now immobile six in a loose formation and overload the six into oblivion, which suggests that sheer numbers won't always prevail in the face of high-level skill in Starcraft II.
Browder then shows a demonstration of protoss warp-in technology, which can be used to mount a powerful surprise offense by summoning a large army seemingly out of nowhere. However, the same tech can apparently be used for base defense; the designer shows how an early zergling raid on a protoss base goes sour as the tiny zerg suddenly find themselves boxed in between protoss buildings and a small contingent of melee-attacking zealots, with immortal tanks lobbing fire from a distance. The designer closes by stating that the team's goals are to "recapture the magic of the original Starcraft, which was a wonderful, wonderful game," and to "make Starcraft II about these three unique races by generating new tactics and strategies."
The panel then takes various questions which reveal some intriguing new details about the sequel. An audience question about future beta plans prompts Pardo to state that Starcraft II will likely have a "closed beta by invitation, similar to [Blizzard's] other products, though this time, [Blizzard] will also enlist the help of pro players to help test for balance." When asked about the status of the terrans (who were decimated at the end of the Brood War expansion pack for the original Starcraft), creative designer Andy Chambers explains that "the UED terran forces were destroyed by Kerrigan's zerg armies (though a few surviving companies may stil be around somewhere)," and that the Terran faction in Starcraft II will primarily consist of the "evil empire" of the Terran Dominion. When asked about the status of lead character Jim Raynor, Chambers replies that since Starcraft II takes place four years after Brood War, "Raynor has been having some adventures for sure," but declines to comment further. Chambers also suggests that the ancient Xel'Naga, which helped both the protoss and zerg races become what they are (but were later destroyed by the zerg) will also figure into Starcraft II's story "in a rather epic tale." To cap the presentation, Browder fields a final question that may come as a relief to some players: that there are "no plans at this time for naval combat in Starcraft II."
All I know at this point is we have at specific and identifiable areas where Blizzard fixed poor/stupid/broken A.I./pathfinding in Starcraft regardless of how it affected people who desire to micro control every little thing. Some of these improvements were manifest in WC3.
And the A.I./pathfinding from early SC2 footage looks to be even more improved for the most part, so again Blizzard regards making it more intelligent/logical/realistic a priority.
I see some evidence that there is at least one area in which it could be improved further, and based on the facts above I am fairly confident Blizzard will follow their priorities and fix it as well.
That's what I want from SC2, and I'm pretty sure I'm gonna get it, in spite of some others wanting otherwise.
Deusfaux on
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
edited May 2007
I think they just didn't want to change what they did with WC2 because they were lazy/wanted to maintain image.
Zen Vulgarity on
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
edited May 2007
I can't tell if G O S U is being stupid or some sort of elaborate joke.
The unit selection cap worked for some races and less for others. (Good for T and P, bad for Z)
I see no problem with that though. I guess I'm just freakin' pumped by this SC2 news that I can't help but hope for the best for this game. Whatever happens. I'm buying it like the good fanboi I am.
The unit selection cap worked for some races and less for others. (Good for T and P, bad for Z)
I see no problem with that though. I guess I'm just freakin' pumped by this SC2 news that I can't help but hope for the best for this game. Whatever happens. I'm buying it like the good fanboi I am.
Bad for Z, but if your going to have Swarms and Hordes, shouldn't you have some sort of disadvantage like that? Hard to keep all those lings in line.
Also: Give me formations! I want to be able to tell my siege tanks to stay behind the marines without having to click 50 million times and worry about some add riddled unit going off on an adventure while i'm doing something somewhere else.
One of the most annoying things about Starcraft is the limit of twelve units to a group, especially if you're playing the Zerg, who rely on unruly swarms rather than, say, the Protoss' small groups of powerful crack troops.
hmmm
Yea? Well fuck those assholes. They SUCK.
This is really juvenile. These are really valid complaints, and you really need to stop shooting them down with "lololz, nubs!"
Reposting the article, it deserves a thread life of more than 20 seconds.
Pardo continues to contrast Warcraft III against Starcraft II, explaining that Warcraft III had less of an emphasis on economic buildup to allow more focus on battles. The 2002 game also, suggests the VP, was much less about early-game victories. While that game did introduce "creeps"--neutral creatures that could be fought to gain experience points for your hero units, early armies in Warcraft III were generally capable of only harrassing your enemies, not defeating them outright. Pardo suggests that "with Starcraft II, [Blizzard is] really going back to its roots to make a true sequel to Starcraft"--a sequel where resource management will be much more central to gameplay, with less micromanagement of different units with special abilities, and in which full-on early-game "rushing" (making an all-out assault at or near the beginning of a new game session) will be much more viable. In fact, the VP goes on to state that the game will probably offer more early "tech tree" optons--different development paths players can take by building different structures and researching different upgrades--which will make early-game scouting more important, and will make early-game rushing a more-diverse and deeper strategy.
Pardo also suggests that Warcraft III might have been a more-forgiving game for beginners--differences in skill levels seemed less pronounced in that game. Says the VP, in Starcraft II, there will be many more nuances that will separate highly skilled players from beginners, and good players from great ones. So in contrast to the sometimes-protracted matches of Warcraft III, Pardo expects the average Starcraft II multiplayer match to last about 20 minutes of real time; possibly even as little as 15 minutes when played by the pros. Pardo points out that there will be numerous subtleties added to the game that expert players will learn to use to their advantage, such as a revamped "high ground" system. In the previous Starcraft, ground units that had a height advantage by standing on high ground gained attack bonuses, but would also reveal themselves when attacking. In the sequel, units with high ground will still gain the attack bonuses but will remain concealed by the "fog of war" (the black shroud that covers unexplored areas)--a fact that can be used together with other line-of-sight nuances to your advantage.
kept the best two blobs of text there..
So the line of sight/fog of war thing that you'd experience if you ever dropped on someone's cliff and they couldn't see you will be revamped so that you can constantly shoot from out of their site and they won't see you? Oh god that's awesome for my dragoon drops (which are now.. Immortal drops, but meh) against T. Of course I'm just theorycrafting in my head, and the game's gonna be completely different but still.. that's exciting.
Unit selection cap means nothing. Of course they'll fix it. Making someone click 8 times instead of one is stupid if there is no reason for it.
Good players will use mass selection when there is a benefit for it (like when you have meticusly spent the last 3 minutes placing your entire army in a crescent infront of the enemy base and he walks into the trap) and smaller controll groups when they need to do that (like when they are assulting the enemy base defences).
Noobs will only use mass selection and once they hit a higher ladder rank that will start costing them games and they will learn.
Path finding and selection are features that mean nothing or very little for gameplay (the new zealot charge with improved pathfinding looks a bit like autosurround to me, that may have to be nerfed).
The unit selection cap worked for some races and less for others. (Good for T and P, bad for Z)
I see no problem with that though. I guess I'm just freakin' pumped by this SC2 news that I can't help but hope for the best for this game. Whatever happens. I'm buying it like the good fanboi I am.
Bad for Z, but if your going to have Swarms and Hordes, shouldn't you have some sort of disadvantage like that? Hard to keep all those lings in line.
Man, that's what overlords are for. Whipping and keeping psychic control over those damned lings. Swarms and Hordes shouldn't have that as an inherent disadvantage.. the gosu Z players aren't better than the gosu T players for instance, and they can control their lings and groups flawlessly.
The unit selection cap worked for some races and less for others. (Good for T and P, bad for Z)
I see no problem with that though. I guess I'm just freakin' pumped by this SC2 news that I can't help but hope for the best for this game. Whatever happens. I'm buying it like the good fanboi I am.
Bad for Z, but if your going to have Swarms and Hordes, shouldn't you have some sort of disadvantage like that? Hard to keep all those lings in line.
The disadvantage for swarms is the individual units die if you look at them funny. Also splash damage.
The 12 unit limit really isn't needed for balance if balance is done properly.
Meh. Previous argumentation aside, let's keep it civil and awesome this time 'round and remember that namecalling and spitting on people has no place in a logical debate.
Wait.. why the fuck was the previous thread closed?.. This forum has something against good logical debate? Bah...
My point still stands, Deusfaux.
We close threads when they get too long/large.
All I have left to say is up there under the big post but I will clarify that units only need to recognize the range of other units they encounter. (not know everything). If the player knows that (from the game documentation or experience or whatever), or if you've encountered the unit before, there's no reason they couldnt know that too. And if they're not already under attack, they dont endanger themselves by moving within range. If they are under attack, or the unit is mobile and can put them under attack, then they fan out/efficiently form a firing line/do not clog up chokepoints and attack it.
If there are times you'd rather they not do these things you can stop them or have them do something else, but this is their default behaviour and it operates on logic.
You can respond to this if you like... but yeah my post up there sums up how I feel on the issue. I'm pretty sure they're gonna improve this so it works well (if its not already - I'm just going by a smidgeon of video footage).
I think it would be awesome if they would alter the Zerg gameplay significantly. Even something as simple as halving all HP, damage and cap imposition and doubling amounts (yes, that would mean 4 zerglings per 50 minerals) would be awesome. Naturally, it wouldn't work for Queens or Defilers or any of that jazz, but I want a Zerg player to FILL THE SCREEN. I want other players to be shocked by the sheer amount of units in their base, even if most of them get one-shotted.
The only problem is that that still puts them at a disadvantage. Let's say there are two units: one with 100 health and 20 damage, and one with 50 health and 10 damage. One of the former is fighting two of the latter. Well, as soon as the second group, on the whole, drops below "50% health" (i.e. one of the units dies) that group is doing 50% less damage.
Charles Kinbote on
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
I wonder what new mechanics they'll have for the zerg.. I don't mind less tough units (they have that already) but simply more, and more resource hogging and what not.. but the worms that spit out the lings? wtf is up with that? Sounds supremely cool so far to me.
Hah. Man, I disagree with you on so many levels, Deusfaux.
I think people will have a very difficult time supporting your position. All units should NOT have knowledge of all other units. You think a Marine has seen every single Zerg strain and every single Protoss unit before he even became a Marine? You think new Zerg strains aren't introduced midway through campaigns?
Your view is just far far too extreme for me, bordering on the units microing themselves. No thank you. I enjoy player input.
Where exactly do you draw the line at what decisions the player should be making? If you need to manually position each individual unit to the inch maybe you should need to click every few seconds to make them breath or they die, click on each individual unit mind you, no group selection for breathing.
The line is drawn in a very clear place, namely, 1.) where the units should go, and 2.) what they should shoot. And the game has a grouping function so that you don't need to literally select every single unit. Boom. Simple. Done. There we go.
Ok so they fan out laterally/form a more efficient firing line if they're not under attack already.
If they are under attack they do the above, and move in closer.
Still an improvement, and doesnt require unit have knowledge of other units' ranges (which I dont think would be unreasonable anyways as one encounter with them would reveal it.)
I think it would be awesome if they would alter the Zerg gameplay significantly. Even something as simple as halving all HP, damage and cap imposition and doubling amounts (yes, that would mean 4 zerglings per 50 minerals) would be awesome. Naturally, it wouldn't work for Queens or Defilers or any of that jazz, but I want a Zerg player to FILL THE SCREEN. I want other players to be shocked by the sheer amount of units in their base, even if most of them get one-shotted.
The only problem is that that still puts them at a disadvantage. Let's say there are two units: one with 100 health and 20 damage, and one with 50 health and 10 damage. One of the former is fighting two of the latter. Well, as soon as the second group, on the whole, drops below "50% health" (i.e. one of the units dies) that group is doing 50% less damage.
It's a trade off. It makes you more vulnerable to splash damage, but makes you more resistant to single hit high damage attack. Say each zealot does 10 damage, and each zergling egg hatch out 2 zerglings each with 10 HP, the zealot will kill the zerglings in 2 hits, the 2 zerglings might get in maybe 2~3 hits before they are wiped out. On the other hand if each egg hatch out 4 zerglings each with 5HP, they will get in more hits and probably more damage even if they deal less damage individually.
Wasn't that many things in SC that could one hit a zergling though, and most of them had splash.
I don't think 1 hit zergs work because the time it takes for the next ling in line to get there will mean that the zealot cooldown is over.
I mean zeals are almost spartans when it comes to holding chokes against lings allready, that would just be insane.
See. That's saying your large group of units is moving and going into long formations without the player doing anything. This is a huge no no in my opinion.
Also, the AI script for your described behavior wouldn't discriminate between small groups and large groups, would it?
It would make sense to do it with like.. 12 Dragoons, but what if there are only 2? They would look pretty fucking stupid "closing in" when fired upon even though they could've started shooting long ago at their maximum range.
I remember a long time ago I made a thread about possible RTS improvements, and one of the ideas I had was that you could "pre-program" your units' default responses to various situations, so that you didn't have to constantly micromanage. For instance, you might tell a group of Marines to hold their ground if Zerglings attack, but fall back if an Ultralisk appears. To me, that's a lot more "strategic" than clicking as fast as you can.
...I don't know to what degree this has to do with the above argument.
Exactly. And maybe this is exactly what Blizz was going for, but it seems silly to me that 4 zerglings, equal in cost to 1 zealot, will be absolutely demolished by said zealot. I recognize the ideas of quality over quantity, but when one race is entirely dependent on quantity, how is it far for equal amounts of resources to get ridiculously unequal types of units?
I think it would be awesome if they would alter the Zerg gameplay significantly. Even something as simple as halving all HP, damage and cap imposition and doubling amounts (yes, that would mean 4 zerglings per 50 minerals) would be awesome. Naturally, it wouldn't work for Queens or Defilers or any of that jazz, but I want a Zerg player to FILL THE SCREEN. I want other players to be shocked by the sheer amount of units in their base, even if most of them get one-shotted.
The only problem is that that still puts them at a disadvantage. Let's say there are two units: one with 100 health and 20 damage, and one with 50 health and 10 damage. One of the former is fighting two of the latter. Well, as soon as the second group, on the whole, drops below "50% health" (i.e. one of the units dies) that group is doing 50% less damage.
That's purely from a 1v1 unit cap stand point. You can also use the two units as cheap scouts, which was a common tactic with lings. I wouldn't mind more "ling/scourge" units, even if they are cheaper, do less damage, have less hp, but you get a shitload more. It will be quite difficult to balance this though, as 2 lings will consistently kill 1 marine, leaving 2 surviving lings if done properly (attack with 2 lings, move the ling that is taking damage away from the fight, so the marine focuses on the other unharmed ling, drag the 1st damaged ling back into the fight so you're fighting at full strength again)
Also, this really annoyed me from the last thread, but nobody pointed this out. You want the medics in FRONT of your marines, not behind. They act as another barrier, especially against melee units. It's like an additional 40/50 hp has been added to your marines.
I wonder what new mechanics they'll have for the zerg.. I don't mind less tough units (they have that already) but simply more, and more resource hogging and what not.. but the worms that spit out the lings? wtf is up with that? Sounds supremely cool so far to me.
Where else can they go with Zerg?
I always liked the Zerg. They seemed far closer to an actually seperate set of mechanics than the Protoss and Terrans. I hope they come up with more nifty ideas for them.
Actually, from the gameplay vids, they seem to be purposely differentiating playstyle more. That teleporting deal for the Protoss makes a lot of sense, and looks freaking awesome.
Exactly. And maybe this is exactly what Blizz was going for, but it seems silly to me that 4 zerglings, equal in cost to 1 zealot, will be absolutely demolished by said zealot. I recognize the ideas of quality over quantity, but when one race is entirely dependent on quantity, how is it far for equal amounts of resources to get ridiculously unequal types of units?
...That's why you don't typically send Zerglings against Zealots.
Yeah they are saying that they want to differentiate gameplay more as well. I think they are only showing us Protoss now on purpose. I wonder how the Terran mechanics will be?
Posts
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/starcraft/review.html
http://pc.ign.com/articles/152/152159p1.html
hmmm
Echo, you poor, poor bastard.
Oh, trust me, I considered locking it and throwing away the key more than once. :P
Yea? Well fuck those assholes. They SUCK.
Am I trolling to agree with you?
Blizzard talks Starcraft II gameplay details
Blizzard Entertainment's top creative talent discusses Starcraft II gameplay details at a panel discussion at its Worldwide Invitational event.
By Andrew Park, GameSpot
SEOUL--Believe it or not, even though the Blizzard Worldwide Invitational 2007 event is home to music concerts and some of the biggest game tournaments in the world, one of the most intriguing activities is actually sitting quietly in a theater. Three of Blizzard's top creative talents, creative director Andy Chambers, senior game designer Dustin Browder, and vice president of game design Rob Pardo sit on a panel to discuss gameplay details for the company's newly announced sequel, Starcraft II.
Pardo begins the discussion by revisiting several of the studio's previous games, going back as far as Warcraft II, which the vice president cites as the first Blizzard game to garner a significant following as a competitive multiplayer game. Pardo explains that the original Starcraft arose from the team's desire to create a fast-paced real-time strategy game like Warcraft II, but in a different universe, then describes how Blizzard's subsequent RTS project, 2002's Warcraft III, took a very different approach by offering slower-paced gameplay with smaller armies, hero units, and many units with activatable abilities to appeal to "the average gamer." Pardo suggests that the units in both the original Starcraft, and in the sequel, will instead act as "movers and shooters"--mostly autonomous forces that generally lack special abilties, but will instead be used in large control groups to "do their own thing" in battle, rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play.
Pardo continues to contrast Warcraft III against Starcraft II, explaining that Warcraft III had less of an emphasis on economic buildup to allow more focus on battles. The 2002 game also, suggests the VP, was much less about early-game victories. While that game did introduce "creeps"--neutral creatures that could be fought to gain experience points for your hero units, early armies in Warcraft III were generally capable of only harrassing your enemies, not defeating them outright. Pardo suggests that "with Starcraft II, [Blizzard is] really going back to its roots to make a true sequel to Starcraft"--a sequel where resource management will be much more central to gameplay, with less micromanagement of different units with special abilities, and in which full-on early-game "rushing" (making an all-out assault at or near the beginning of a new game session) will be much more viable. In fact, the VP goes on to state that the game will probably offer more early "tech tree" optons--different development paths players can take by building different structures and researching different upgrades--which will make early-game scouting more important, and will make early-game rushing a more-diverse and deeper strategy.
Pardo also suggests that Warcraft III might have been a more-forgiving game for beginners--differences in skill levels seemed less pronounced in that game. Says the VP, in Starcraft II, there will be many more nuances that will separate highly skilled players from beginners, and good players from great ones. So in contrast to the sometimes-protracted matches of Warcraft III, Pardo expects the average Starcraft II multiplayer match to last about 20 minutes of real time; possibly even as little as 15 minutes when played by the pros. Pardo points out that there will be numerous subtleties added to the game that expert players will learn to use to their advantage, such as a revamped "high ground" system. In the previous Starcraft, ground units that had a height advantage by standing on high ground gained attack bonuses, but would also reveal themselves when attacking. In the sequel, units with high ground will still gain the attack bonuses but will remain concealed by the "fog of war" (the black shroud that covers unexplored areas)--a fact that can be used together with other line-of-sight nuances to your advantage.
Pardo ends his part of the talk by emphasizing that Blizzard remains committed to making the three factions distinct, and to making Starcraft II's gameplay true to the original game, but also different and new. For instance, the VP cites the new protoss units and abilities that have been shown--the ability to "warp-in" to different locations, and the powerful mothership unit. Says the VP, yes, Blizzard could have also looked to create a "terran version" and a "protoss version" of these new units and abilities, but the team did not. It is instead looking to balance the factions against each other while keeping them distinct. Pardo suggests that Starcraft II will, like the original game, still be a game about "hard counters"--such as how certain units can be directly "countered" (defeated decisively) by specific counter-units; as an example, Pardo shows a brief demonstration of protoss templar units, which are the counter-unit to zerglings, annihilating a swarm of the tiny zerg infantry with their "psi storm" ability. Says Pardo: "Yes, [Starcraft II] will stil be fast-paced and have 'multitasking' for resources and combat, but it'll be a very different game."
The floor is then given to game designer Dustin Browder, who uses his time to cite specific examples of different units in play. To begin with, Browder shows a demonstration of the protoss stalker, a ground-based unit that can attack both air and ground enemies and isn't all that tough, but can "blink" (warp in and out) to any location to which they have line of sight. The obvious uses of this handy ability include pursuing fleeing units by constantly "blinking in" in front of them, but they can also apparently be used as powerful base raiders by bypassing terrain barriers if you have an aerial scout, such as the protoss phoenix, to quickly get you line-of-sight beyond terrain obstacles. In addition, extremely skilled players will be able to defeat slower-moving melee enemies with stalkers by sticking and moving, repeatedly blinking in and out of range. The designer shows a demonstration of stalkers up against a group of protoss zealots, somewhat slow melee units that simply aren't able to close in for a hit as the stalkers keep blinking away and firing constantly, eventually winning the battle.
Browder shows how the new units and new abilties for existing units will help diversify gameplay and work within the counter-unit system. For instance, the protoss immortal, a ground-based tank unit, is extremely tough but slow (and can therefore be countered by quick-thinking players with enough resources to build up counter-units, and is also therefore not able to effectively flee from a losing battle), and possesses a powerful energy shield that is triggered only from heavy-duty fire. This makes the immortal a natural counter-unit for the terran siege tank, whose powerful cannons can't do much against the immortal's energy shield. However, the slow-moving immortals themselves can be easily countered by a large swarm of zerglings, which don't deal enough damage to trigger the immortals' shields, and are too quick for the tank to outrun.
Browder then shows an additional example of the kind of subtleties that will separate skilled players from unskilled players. The protoss phoenix, a flying unit, has a special "overload" ability that creates a damaging energy field around itself, then renders it immobile and helpless shortly afterward. Browder shows a simulated battle between a player with six phoenix units and another player with only four. The player with six phoenixes apparently chokes and uses the overload ability too early, allowing the other player to dodge out of harm's way, then arrange the four phoenixes around the now immobile six in a loose formation and overload the six into oblivion, which suggests that sheer numbers won't always prevail in the face of high-level skill in Starcraft II.
Browder then shows a demonstration of protoss warp-in technology, which can be used to mount a powerful surprise offense by summoning a large army seemingly out of nowhere. However, the same tech can apparently be used for base defense; the designer shows how an early zergling raid on a protoss base goes sour as the tiny zerg suddenly find themselves boxed in between protoss buildings and a small contingent of melee-attacking zealots, with immortal tanks lobbing fire from a distance. The designer closes by stating that the team's goals are to "recapture the magic of the original Starcraft, which was a wonderful, wonderful game," and to "make Starcraft II about these three unique races by generating new tactics and strategies."
The panel then takes various questions which reveal some intriguing new details about the sequel. An audience question about future beta plans prompts Pardo to state that Starcraft II will likely have a "closed beta by invitation, similar to [Blizzard's] other products, though this time, [Blizzard] will also enlist the help of pro players to help test for balance." When asked about the status of the terrans (who were decimated at the end of the Brood War expansion pack for the original Starcraft), creative designer Andy Chambers explains that "the UED terran forces were destroyed by Kerrigan's zerg armies (though a few surviving companies may stil be around somewhere)," and that the Terran faction in Starcraft II will primarily consist of the "evil empire" of the Terran Dominion. When asked about the status of lead character Jim Raynor, Chambers replies that since Starcraft II takes place four years after Brood War, "Raynor has been having some adventures for sure," but declines to comment further. Chambers also suggests that the ancient Xel'Naga, which helped both the protoss and zerg races become what they are (but were later destroyed by the zerg) will also figure into Starcraft II's story "in a rather epic tale." To cap the presentation, Browder fields a final question that may come as a relief to some players: that there are "no plans at this time for naval combat in Starcraft II."
And the A.I./pathfinding from early SC2 footage looks to be even more improved for the most part, so again Blizzard regards making it more intelligent/logical/realistic a priority.
I see some evidence that there is at least one area in which it could be improved further, and based on the facts above I am fairly confident Blizzard will follow their priorities and fix it as well.
That's what I want from SC2, and I'm pretty sure I'm gonna get it, in spite of some others wanting otherwise.
I see no problem with that though. I guess I'm just freakin' pumped by this SC2 news that I can't help but hope for the best for this game. Whatever happens. I'm buying it like the good fanboi I am.
Bad for Z, but if your going to have Swarms and Hordes, shouldn't you have some sort of disadvantage like that? Hard to keep all those lings in line.
Also: Give me formations! I want to be able to tell my siege tanks to stay behind the marines without having to click 50 million times and worry about some add riddled unit going off on an adventure while i'm doing something somewhere else.
My point still stands, Deusfaux.
kept the best two blobs of text there..
So the line of sight/fog of war thing that you'd experience if you ever dropped on someone's cliff and they couldn't see you will be revamped so that you can constantly shoot from out of their site and they won't see you? Oh god that's awesome for my dragoon drops (which are now.. Immortal drops, but meh) against T. Of course I'm just theorycrafting in my head, and the game's gonna be completely different but still.. that's exciting.
Rushes are deeper and more varied? FUCK YES.
Good players will use mass selection when there is a benefit for it (like when you have meticusly spent the last 3 minutes placing your entire army in a crescent infront of the enemy base and he walks into the trap) and smaller controll groups when they need to do that (like when they are assulting the enemy base defences).
Noobs will only use mass selection and once they hit a higher ladder rank that will start costing them games and they will learn.
Path finding and selection are features that mean nothing or very little for gameplay (the new zealot charge with improved pathfinding looks a bit like autosurround to me, that may have to be nerfed).
Man, that's what overlords are for. Whipping and keeping psychic control over those damned lings. Swarms and Hordes shouldn't have that as an inherent disadvantage.. the gosu Z players aren't better than the gosu T players for instance, and they can control their lings and groups flawlessly.
The disadvantage for swarms is the individual units die if you look at them funny. Also splash damage.
The 12 unit limit really isn't needed for balance if balance is done properly.
*cums on you all*
That was totally called for though.
We close threads when they get too long/large.
All I have left to say is up there under the big post but I will clarify that units only need to recognize the range of other units they encounter. (not know everything). If the player knows that (from the game documentation or experience or whatever), or if you've encountered the unit before, there's no reason they couldnt know that too. And if they're not already under attack, they dont endanger themselves by moving within range. If they are under attack, or the unit is mobile and can put them under attack, then they fan out/efficiently form a firing line/do not clog up chokepoints and attack it.
If there are times you'd rather they not do these things you can stop them or have them do something else, but this is their default behaviour and it operates on logic.
You can respond to this if you like... but yeah my post up there sums up how I feel on the issue. I'm pretty sure they're gonna improve this so it works well (if its not already - I'm just going by a smidgeon of video footage).
The only problem is that that still puts them at a disadvantage. Let's say there are two units: one with 100 health and 20 damage, and one with 50 health and 10 damage. One of the former is fighting two of the latter. Well, as soon as the second group, on the whole, drops below "50% health" (i.e. one of the units dies) that group is doing 50% less damage.
Where else can they go with Zerg?
I think people will have a very difficult time supporting your position. All units should NOT have knowledge of all other units. You think a Marine has seen every single Zerg strain and every single Protoss unit before he even became a Marine? You think new Zerg strains aren't introduced midway through campaigns?
Your view is just far far too extreme for me, bordering on the units microing themselves. No thank you. I enjoy player input.
The line is drawn in a very clear place, namely, 1.) where the units should go, and 2.) what they should shoot. And the game has a grouping function so that you don't need to literally select every single unit. Boom. Simple. Done. There we go.
If they are under attack they do the above, and move in closer.
Still an improvement, and doesnt require unit have knowledge of other units' ranges (which I dont think would be unreasonable anyways as one encounter with them would reveal it.)
It's a trade off. It makes you more vulnerable to splash damage, but makes you more resistant to single hit high damage attack. Say each zealot does 10 damage, and each zergling egg hatch out 2 zerglings each with 10 HP, the zealot will kill the zerglings in 2 hits, the 2 zerglings might get in maybe 2~3 hits before they are wiped out. On the other hand if each egg hatch out 4 zerglings each with 5HP, they will get in more hits and probably more damage even if they deal less damage individually.
Upping the selection cap will rule, I used to have 10 hotkeys of zerglings with a ton left over.
I don't think 1 hit zergs work because the time it takes for the next ling in line to get there will mean that the zealot cooldown is over.
I mean zeals are almost spartans when it comes to holding chokes against lings allready, that would just be insane.
Also, the AI script for your described behavior wouldn't discriminate between small groups and large groups, would it?
It would make sense to do it with like.. 12 Dragoons, but what if there are only 2? They would look pretty fucking stupid "closing in" when fired upon even though they could've started shooting long ago at their maximum range.
...I don't know to what degree this has to do with the above argument.
That's purely from a 1v1 unit cap stand point. You can also use the two units as cheap scouts, which was a common tactic with lings. I wouldn't mind more "ling/scourge" units, even if they are cheaper, do less damage, have less hp, but you get a shitload more. It will be quite difficult to balance this though, as 2 lings will consistently kill 1 marine, leaving 2 surviving lings if done properly (attack with 2 lings, move the ling that is taking damage away from the fight, so the marine focuses on the other unharmed ling, drag the 1st damaged ling back into the fight so you're fighting at full strength again)
Also, this really annoyed me from the last thread, but nobody pointed this out. You want the medics in FRONT of your marines, not behind. They act as another barrier, especially against melee units. It's like an additional 40/50 hp has been added to your marines.
Actually, from the gameplay vids, they seem to be purposely differentiating playstyle more. That teleporting deal for the Protoss makes a lot of sense, and looks freaking awesome.
...That's why you don't typically send Zerglings against Zealots.