Originally posted by: rh71
what would be on your wishlist of new features of a Starcraft 2 though ?
Originally posted by: amoeba
Originally posted by: rh71
what would be on your wishlist of new features of a Starcraft 2 though ?
better graphics, doesn't have to be 3d though. 4 races with perfect balance and different style for each race. higher max unit count. play at same pace as original instead of the Warcraft 3 pace.
Add in some of the things implemented in War3 such as autocasting.
Oh and no heroes.
Originally posted by: amoeba
Blizzard has lost a lot of their key employees though.
Originally posted by: amoeba
Originally posted by: rh71
what would be on your wishlist of new features of a Starcraft 2 though ?
better graphics, doesn't have to be 3d though. 4 races with perfect balance and different style for each race. higher max unit count. play at same pace as original instead of the Warcraft 3 pace.
Add in some of the things implemented in War3 such as autocasting.
Oh and no heroes.
i think warcraft 3 is a great step in the evolution of RTS. the addition of the heros adds another dimension to the game and extends strategy beyond just building *more* *faster*. i much prefer warcraft in that when i lose i can say, crap i built the wrong units, or man i made some serious mistakes in control. whereas in SC all i can say is WTF how does he have so many more units...Originally posted by: five40
Originally posted by: amoeba
Originally posted by: rh71
what would be on your wishlist of new features of a Starcraft 2 though ?
better graphics, doesn't have to be 3d though. 4 races with perfect balance and different style for each race. higher max unit count. play at same pace as original instead of the Warcraft 3 pace.
Add in some of the things implemented in War3 such as autocasting.
Oh and no heroes.
Agreed. Maybe even 5 or 6 races would be cool. A much much higher max unit count would be great. So basically SC1 with better graphics, more races, and higher unit count. And I'll be really really disappointed if they do heros. Heros are the reason why I don't like Warcraft3.
Originally posted by: blakeatwork
What do you call Warcraft 3 then???
As precursor to WoW, it made sense.. as a standalone game, it wasn't very good...
Originally posted by: purbeast0
i don't know anyone who loved warcraft 2, then played warcraft 3 and said they were truly satisfied with the game.
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
i think warcraft 3 is a great step in the evolution of RTS. the addition of the heros adds another dimension to the game and extends strategy beyond just building *more* *faster*. i much prefer warcraft in that when i lose i can say, crap i built the wrong units, or man i made some serious mistakes in control. whereas in SC all i can say is WTF how does he have so many more units...Originally posted by: five40
Originally posted by: amoeba
Originally posted by: rh71
what would be on your wishlist of new features of a Starcraft 2 though ?
better graphics, doesn't have to be 3d though. 4 races with perfect balance and different style for each race. higher max unit count. play at same pace as original instead of the Warcraft 3 pace.
Add in some of the things implemented in War3 such as autocasting.
Oh and no heroes.
Agreed. Maybe even 5 or 6 races would be cool. A much much higher max unit count would be great. So basically SC1 with better graphics, more races, and higher unit count. And I'll be really really disappointed if they do heros. Heros are the reason why I don't like Warcraft3.
Originally posted by: amoeba
mass hydra only works at the newbie level.
Those who thinks of starcraft as only massing have not played it at its highest skill level.
Its just like me saying mass huntress is a viable strategy in war3. Obviously its not, but to the newbie, it seems ok.
Originally posted by: five40
Totally agreed. Mass hyrda wouldn't work against someone good. Going with a huge mass was always fun though. The best is when you could get your guys up to 600 and go in and just destroy someone else with around 30 groups of guys.
Originally posted by: amoeba
The biggest difference between SC and war3 is that SC is a game of hard counters where war3 is a game of soft counters.
Originally posted by: five40
My problem with the heros in Warcraft3 are that you can get them a ton of power by having them kill the little by-stander characters on the screen. I haven't played Warcraft3 much at all but my experience just wasn't fun. All the people I would play would have their heros just run around killing all the innocent stuff, level up a bunch by doing that, then eventually just come and kill me. The person who wins a game shouldn't be the one who can find and kill the bystander type people first. And also the number of units was to low. I liked having all out battles in starcraft.
Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Originally posted by: five40
Totally agreed. Mass hyrda wouldn't work against someone good. Going with a huge mass was always fun though. The best is when you could get your guys up to 600 and go in and just destroy someone else with around 30 groups of guys.
mass huntress was a viable strategy until blizzard nerfed them with frozen throne, the only counter was air and air units were generally worthless and a higher tier.
what do you counter mass hydras with then? In maps with choak points you had options, but not all maps had those...
And then, the real reason starcraft sucks, is just all the idiots on battlenet who want a "perfect record" so they beg for draws or recreate thier account after one loss, or disconnect. The warcraft 3 ladder system is almost perfect.