Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 9:36 am Post subject:
blubb wrote:
this is so ztyping idiotic, whoever is in charge of the left panel especially deserves to be punched in the face, by horse hooves.
i'm ztyping out, because they will change the crap to the noob players demands, i'm out, playing starcraft 2, a much better game than this will ever be.
Wow, you sure can overreact. As I said, these are mostly suggestions and brainstorming. From what I gathered, none of this is set in stone, and in fact we had some interesting discussions about most of the items.
In the alpha we played, oil derricks were in, in the "Starcraft vespene gas" but without being a separate resource, meaning, you build a derrick on an (indestructible) oil well, and just get normal credits ("gold", lol) from that.
mevitar wrote:
Complex tech tree? Huh?
What do certain people want, tank spam and win?
Well, at this moment, tech trees are a complex combination of upgrades and buildings in which it's quite hard to find your way. For example, it's not really straightforward that to get all vehicle types for GLA, you need to build 2 war factories, and upgrade each with different specializations. There are also things like the fact the EU faction has a normal barracks and an advanced barracks, each producing only 2 unit types. There are certainly some oddities in there that could stand to be done differently. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
IT IS ztyping SUPPOSED TO
THAT IS THE WAY IT SHOULD WORK
goddamned, people are supposed to punch their own strategy and timing through upgrade/production balance.
there's no need for "the player must have access to all vehicles immediately" then let him build 2 warfacs, it's his choice which way he wants to fight, why stripping the strategy game of it's strategies?
yeah i overreact, because it looked like finally a cool looking cnc with good mechanics, these sudden giant list of utterly stupid changes is infuriating. it's literally pushing me to starcraft 2.
edit: when heart of the swarm was released or starcraft 2, they were going with the formula, hard to use units like vipers are in the game because people have to figure out how they're used.
cnc players obviously need a mother besides the pc to hold hands. _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:03 am Post subject:
blubb wrote:
there's no need for "the player must have access to all vehicles immediately"
I never said that, either. But right now, some parts of the tech tree are simply confusing to the player, to the point where some units are more like easter eggs than actual logical tech tree unlockables. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 4:59 pm Post subject:
Blubb, go play your Starcrap then. Or even better, play Warzone and enjoy the complexity. Even after 10 years I couldn't max out the tech tree once.... That list is actually interesting and gave me hope (tho squads were a silly idea in TW IMO). _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
This. If you really love Starcraft so much that you must put in into almost every sentence you type, then go just play it instead of whining how an alpha stage game already sucks because it's not Starcraft. You surely can do things differently than in Starcraft while still keeping it as a difficult game; with your current stance you aren't really even giving the developers a chance. Also, keep in mind that they can't make a direct copy of Starcraft either; that way, they'd have no players since everyone would just stick to the game which has already established a very large fanbase and has similar mechanics. _________________ CnCNet Client | CnCNet TS patches | More Quality-of-Life Improvements for RA Remastered
no,what i mean is that, starcraft 2 is to the community and the dev's such an evil game, they have to make the direct opposite instead of trying out what starcraft did before and refine things, they don't give the *system* a chance, nor the mechanics, despite them being the top RTS mechanics.
because?
cnc fan.
edit: oh, remember when we said we would wait for the developers how tib twilight would be after letting them do their thing? _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:22 am Post subject:
Starcrap.. top RTS mechanics...
Really. Get away, fool. It's not top. It's just better-balanced compared to most of the rest.
Warzone mechanics are also as good as that, but the game never got a second chance. C&C mechanics are also good but their implementation was shitty all the time.
This game needs a faster pace and they are aiming for that, not well-raped Warcraft's.
EDIT: This is nothing compared to Tib Twilight, this time they want to go Generals. Generals was already a too Warcraft-mechanics-based game without most C&C mechanics. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
really? faster pace? the game at gamescom looked a lot like really fast paced. this is not an fps you know.
Starcraft had the ideal balance, it so happened that it's the top RTS out there, atleast broodwar. also, genereals derived other mechanics directly from the game too, so whats the bad thing about it?
if you on the other hand want faster pace, why don't you play red alert 1 online? _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:31 am Post subject:
Red Alert 1 sucks and you know it. I'll keep myself to Red Resurrection and Mental Omega.
Because they are better than Starcraft in every way.
But go zergrushes... oh, I mean tankrushes... oh wait... _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:45 am Post subject:
I said faster pace, not tankrushes. You pushed that to me.
Faster pace is to not go wait on vespene gas to tech up to T3. But also not T1 tankspamming.
I am serious. And really, go play your ideally broken Brood Wars but leave us out. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
you rather want every tech from the get go without accomplishing anything, is it that? why the need for tech levels anyway? what do you mean with "us" ?
oh iot's just not "my" ideal brood war, look at rts history please. _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Me thinks the tech tree is too complicated currently and they're just toning it down a bit. Even I would've ripped my hair off if I couldn't find a specific unit due to the countless prerequisites needed (it happened to me a number of times in some mods, both CnC and not). This is an RTS game, not find Waldo... No one in this thread said anything about ditching tech trees and getting everything from the get-go without doing shit :/
Though removing tech trees for a faction does add in variety a bit. The Confederate faction in RA3: Paradox have access too ALL of their infantry/units right of the bat, but are generally pathetic and must be upgraded in order to actually become useful.
Oil needs to come back. That was a neat idea. Similarity to SC's Vaspene Gas is no excuse. Just let the Oil Derricks produce oil over time. No need to use harvesters like in SC. See? One less similarity
Tankspam needs to stay. It isn't APA/China without tankspam since that's one of their main tactics, along with infantryspam and artillery support.
Banshee wrote:
The pylon system was removed, so APA and EU has the same power system in the upcoming alpha version.
*Spy voice* May I make a suggestion: give EU the pylon system. Add some variety in it. APA gets power the old fashion way, EU's structures are powered by a nearby pylon (IIRC the Novus in UaW also used this method with their Flow Generators), and the GLA runs their crap with surplus car batteries (in short: they still don't need power). That pylon thing for base defences is pretty neat though. _________________ The future belongs to The Forgotten! Last edited by freedom fighter on Tue Aug 27, 2013 9:20 am; edited 2 times in total QUICK_EDIT
*Spy voice* May I make a suggestion: give EU the pylon system. Add some variety in it. APA gets power the old fashion way, EU's structures are powered by a nearby pylon (IIRC the Novus in UaW also used this method with their Flow Generators), and the GLA runs their crap with surplus car batteries (in short: they still don't need power). That pylon thing for base defences is pretty neat though.
i find myself agreeing with Blubb here and that shocks and amuses me!
That said, how do you increase the pace of C&C without either A: Changing resources, or B: Changing the tech tree?
Do you cut unit ROF, speed, buff armor? Well, thats one idea, but nobody wants to watch a mammoth tank spend a hour fighting off two medium tanks. The normal C&C method of boosting the pace comes in the form of encouraging early game spam - either passively or actively. RA1 started this by increasing the speed by which tanks are built by building WFs.
Then the strategy held for RA1 - and absolutely discouraged any advancements up the tech tree past the Radar. You can't go higher because you need every credit for light tanks. Your opponent cant go higher because of the same thing. The guy who does so that he can build, I don't know, chrono tanks, is a gambling man at best and probably going to get his ass flattened when the douchebag he's fighting gets his light tanks to the base.
Why? Why the hell do C&C fans want to keep this style of game play? Its atrocious and pointless. It makes a vast majority of the units worthless on mot of the maps. The game is reduced to a build order - planning. Not strategy. RTS is a game of drill. Why in the name of God do you want to keep this? Its horrible. When change is introduced, the fans fight it tooth and nail. Take YR for instance and Yuri being banned... and tour of egypt (ONE MAP) ending up the most played thing in the game.
And what kind of maps are the most popular in post YR games? Tour of Egypt-esque symmetrical maps which turn a game about grand strategy and exotic weapons into a ztyping reflex test. A top-down twitch shooter.
What a stagnant, dull, genre. Jesus Christ. Gamers scream about Call of Duty doing the same (they do change stuff up if you pay attention to the devs), but when their baby remains the same, God forbid you change one thing or they'll cry murder. C&C's fanbase is its biggest ball and chain it seems. _________________ Victory! QUICK_EDIT
Maybe not better than Starcraft, but better than any C&C installment for sure.
thats an easier task you'd imagine.
yeah, i'm sorry volgin that the one you're agreeing with is such an emotional idiotic slob of meat
but yeah, volgin pretty much states the obvious
cnc fans argue always with "the chore like eco/macro of starcraft is so chore like, it feels as being a burden that gives no means or depth to the gameplay." wrong. cnc players are naturally being lazy to embark in a game of real time chess, the set up is as important as the "fun and action". -.-
in cnc there's no such thing as "planning a specific build", anyways it wasn't possible until TW hit the scene, which was still a very simple game, and it's by all means not hard to master. everyone knows from the beginning how it works. (and dev's dare to still work tutorials in, it's like shitting on your intelligence if all you can do on screen is intuitively self explanatory). _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:33 pm Post subject:
Maybe a really silly idea, but can anyone tell me what is the reason they don't use the gameplay/ideas from Generals, remake those in a new engine, create a new story and release that? Why fix what's not broken? Why add all kind of sillyness that is clearly ripped from other games? And yes, I am fully aware Generals was the closest to Starcraft/Warcraft C&C has got with the moved 'side'bar and the way bases are build.
Just look at TD -> TS -> TW (ignoring the horrible TT). They all use the same base: start with MCV/ConYard, build base, harvest Tiberium, create army, enjoy the show. However, with the RA series it went (imho) downhill with RA3 because of two things: different styles of base building/teching (same problem this game seems to have according to what I read), and the removal of Ore fields (and Gems) for some kind of single-use supply dock. QUICK_EDIT
i'd have nothing against it, generals 1 in retrospect was a good game, but looooook how old it is, don't you agree that new elements or refinements to the gameplay are neccessary? _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 3:48 pm Post subject:
blubb wrote:
i'd have nothing against it, generals 1 in retrospect was a good game, but looooook how old it is, don't you agree that new elements or refinements to the gameplay are neccessary?
Like what? Give some examples that prefably aren't ripped from any other recent RTS, and fit Generals. QUICK_EDIT
generals previously ripped from starcraft, so whats the evil thing about deriving working mechanics from another game and refining them?
more macro/eco elements (yeah, your chores you don't like, which train multitasking).
more upgrades and more things that set all factions apart
crushing is debatable (a mechanic that can eradicate all units from a techtree instantaneously?) i'm not suggesting to remove it, but maybe to twek it in a way , infantry would play an equally viable role than vehicles.
in cnc there's no such thing as "planning a specific build", anyways it wasn't possible until TW hit the scene, which was still a very simple game, and it's by all means not hard to master. everyone knows from the beginning how it works.
Let's all build 4 cranes and do a T3 turret crawl through whole map with airfields.
Quote:
Like what? Give some examples that prefably aren't ripped from any other recent RTS, and fit Generals.
> Good vehicle turning, emphasis on micromanagement and tactic
> Different turning speed for turrets, while in Starcraft everything is instant
> Vehicle acceleration
> Infantry/Mech combination in place of classic Tank Spam or starcrafty BioBioBioBio + Mech Last edited by Martin Killer on Tue Aug 27, 2013 4:07 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
in cnc there's no such thing as "planning a specific build", anyways it wasn't possible until TW hit the scene, which was still a very simple game, and it's by all means not hard to master. everyone knows from the beginning how it works.
Let's all build 4 cranes and do a T3 turret crawl through whole map with airfields.
which is an utterly stupid thing to watch.
these building crawl "strategies" are such an idiotic move, i'm sorry when i played RA 1 online, and someone did something similar, with tesla coils and powerplants, it looked like someone who literally fucked the engine in the arse while making an aheago face.
> Infantry/Mech combination in place of classic Tank Spam or starcrafty BioBioBioBio + Mech
they tweaked that in hots i believe, because that game is constantly updated, unlike any cnc title up to date.
bio & mech combinations can be indeed a good composition, if they're countering the correct targets. _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 4:08 pm Post subject:
Martin Killer wrote:
> Good vehicle turning, emphasis on micromanagement and tactic
> Vehicle acceleration
> Infantry/Mech combination in place of classic Tank Spam or starcrafty BioBioBioBio + Mech
1) Combined with the weaker side/rear armor system from TW: good
2) Sound alright
3) Not exactly sure what you mean. You mean like tanks being bad against inf, and need their own inf as support (as in RL)?
I do must say that I didn't think of 1 and 2 because that aren't really 'big' gameplay elements (unless you use 1 with armor system, then it becomes interesting).
Of course, this is just what I think. The way Generals 2 looks now doesn't trigger my interest; I'll most likely go to MO when it's released. QUICK_EDIT
It means, that a game isn't oriented on tanks like older C&C titles or only around infantry like Warhammer 40K where tanks are a pure support. QUICK_EDIT
The strongest feature of infantry, in real life as well, is its versatility and capability for deception and camouflage. In World in Conflict, for example, infantry can the weakest units - they can be easily crushed, killed by machine guns, phosphorus and napalm - but that doesn't stop them from being extremely useful. When ordered in a forest, they disappear from the enemy sight (unless they have infantry in the woods as well), meaning tanks can't fire blindly into the woods. From there, the infantry can perform devastating ambush strikes on enemy armor. This on the other hand adds importance to support powers such as napalm bombing and daisy cutter, which are effective at clearing forests. Also, infantry can garrison structures in urban areas, providing excellent protection (since WiC has no weapons that instantly clear garrisonned buildings ala Generals, urban areas are strategically much more important). Too bad no C&C so far has had any features like these. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
C&C always has been about the tanks, excluding the rare Commando infantry for some missions.
That changed pretty much since Generals and most forthcoming titles. Mostly because infantry and air units are no longer pathetically weak vs tanks.
Red alert 2 is one of the C&C that suffers most from this tanks only gamedesign with the occasional freak unit.
As much as I hate Twilight the idea behind the resource system wasn't all that bad. Having buildtime instead of money and the crystals you had to collect on the field. _________________ Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:42 pm Post subject:
Resource system, TT? It only had food.
Starcraft always sucked, big time. At least for me. I favor any Warcraft over that one. Esp 2 or 3: RoC.
And yea, MO balance actually made tiering and inf cool. Ofc better than Starcrap. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Starcraft always sucked, big time. At least for me. I favor any Warcraft over that one. Esp 2 or 3: RoC.
And yea, MO balance actually made tiering and inf cool. Ofc better than Starcrap.
warcraft 3 is ....nearly pure micro, so yeah, that explains a lot.
starcrafts eco management must feel like a chore to you then.
but thats what makes it good, it's balance between extensive makro and micro. at lower levels it's good for new or casual players, and at high levels it's a great thinking and reaction based game for korean fingers or multitaskers in general. i guess you want a more easy going game then that doesn't distract you with unneccessary actions like, chosing which upgrade would be important but beforehand managing how much gas you'd harvest. or how much refineries you built when and what you have to sacrifice for early research. i suppose you want to have "TANK FROM FACTORY BOUGHT WITH GOLD END OF STORY". _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Well not sure who's side I'm on but TD seems to me to have by far the best C&C multiplayer and is very often filled with anything but tank spam. This should be the game Victory take inspiration from for any one resource RTS I think... it is quick and frantic and very fun.
1) it has nice small or constrained maps, IMO making the difference between inf and vehicles smaller, infantry being a lot more useful not having to run a mile.
2) the eco can often be quite slow, also making infantry more important because they're cheaper. Usually in the beginning especially there is an infantry stage of Flamethrower and Grenadier battles that are all about micro and very exciting. Later even just one or two tanks can be decisive.
3) base crawling is definitely a thing and very fun to do, this is the macro part I suppose, building towards (quite literally) a good economy while constantly microing units at the same time. It's important to get map control, especially considering the small size of the maps.
4) no units are really completely useless... especially with structures being so weak it's all about the battle on the field, often over resources. I feel like TD maps (and Dune) got it right in not having a 'safe' resource patch for each player at the back of the base, so you always have to maintain control of the cash.
I think though SC2 simply got it right by maintaining the pixel accuracy you get with 2D RTS despite the transition to 3D whereas the last C&Cs and this one seem much more liberal in structure and unit positioning, for example. QUICK_EDIT
3) base crawling is definitely a thing and very fun to do, this is the macro part I suppose, building towards (quite literally) a good economy while constantly microing units at the same time. It's important to get map control, especially considering the small size of the maps.
RA1 is ztyping stupid, to be honest. Praises are overrated for that game. The gameplay is braindead, the sides are inbalanced, and it is just... crap. _________________ Victory! QUICK_EDIT
RA1 is ztyping stupid, to be honest. Praises are overrated for that game. The gameplay is braindead, the sides are inbalanced, and it is just... crap.
Yep its pretty stale.
Its always just Russia vs Germany and the first player to amass enough Tanks... Its Tank Spam at its very core. _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
