• 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    Is the starport building built after the 2nd level town hall? And it needs to be added to the google doc.

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    @AtikLYar: Go

    Well, thank you for clearing that up. How about clearing up:

    Quote from HamsterBoo: Go

    but what tier are the other fliers in?

    If they are made archon style, that sounds very tier 1.5 to me. How do we delay air tech?

    @DrSuperEvil: Go

    Well, that feels more like manufacturing than salvaging to me. I'm talking about a caster that would have to be nearby/in battles in order to gain energy on the premise that it is taking the scrap parts from the dead and using them for its abilities.

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    @Mattlington: Go

    This. There will already be enough grief over such an early unit that can shoot up (scout drone will wreck overlords). Air units should definitely require the level 2 town hall along with an extra cost (production building, tech requirement, etc.). Maybe if you slowed down the Assembly Droid a little bit and gave the tier 2 town hall a tech that gave them hover capability (increased speed and the ability to morph into flying units)?

    Also, reading through I notice that there isn't really a standard tier 2 unit, only very situational units (a massive AA, 3 casters, and a melee unit that sounds more like a caster). And as I look, there is a rather ridiculous amount of AA. I think that needs to be toned down significantly (with units being reduced to ranged ground only).

    Edit: missed the page 14 posts somehow... but in reply I really dislike the idea of every game vs. this race being a rush static air defense game (which it would have to be, because you can't wait until you have scouted it or you are dead, as tier 1.5 produces so fast). And if it is good vs marines, then is terran just screwed until it gets vikings/thors? If the tier 1.5 flier is a repair/detector (basically half observer half medivac?), then its ok, but what tier are the other fliers in?

    Edit2: on a side note, since this is a race kindof based on scrap parts, I would really like to see a caster that has no mana regen, but gains mana every time a unit dies nearby and maybe can sacrifice allied units to gain a larger amount of energy. It would really add to the feel of the race being one that makes use of whatever it can find. Maybe the Petard?

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    Oh, I was looking at about the bit where you say lower tier units can morph into higher tier units (to recycle them). I can see why having the battlecruiser-esk morph for every unit would be an issue (anything significant enough is too confusing for the other player, while anything insignificant is insignificant).

    I guess I was thinking more along the lines of "You build a zealot, zealot can morph into either dark templar or high templar, or get leg speed". It doesn't have the insignificance problem or the too confusing problem.

    So what is the current unit building mechanic? I read the document but it doesn't seem very clear. Are units built terran style?

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    @SoulFilcher: Go

    I definitely agree. If I could explain my idea better, however, it would be very similar to a cross between zerg and terran mechanics (ie, not too differentfrom the standard SC2 system). It is similar to zerg in that all units are buildable from a single unit (larva) with a possible intermediate stage (zergling-baneling). Where it differs, is that there are more intermediate stages and you do not need the tech to upgrade. It is similar to Terran in that you can build tiered buildings (barracks, factory, starport) and then add addons to specialize the individual buildings to produce units (tech lab). Where it differs, is that a each unit has its respective addon (instead of the all purpose tech lab).

    As to your second point, I think all the races kindof feel overused right now. I also think the race has somewhat been built on Terran-centric views (it is all very human-robot like), so it is hard to break out of the race being Terran-created.

    edit: I guess I didn't realize that when you guys were talking about morphs, you meant a normal number of units, plus variations on those units (which I agree is ridiculous). I wrote assuming that the morph system was a necessary step for producing higher tier units (like the zergling-baneling morph).

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Community Project #2- Brainstorming/Design Thread

    I always had an issue with humans having the worst technology but somehow surviving due to their "ingenuity". Really wish there would be 1 game where this role was given to someone else.

    What I was thinking skimming over this article was a race kindof like the little hooded guys in Star Wars, roaming around and using scrap parts from all three races to build better units. Works really well with the idea that units are upgraded individually into new units (like zergling-baneling, except a much larger tree).

    Frankly I think once you start dealing with a purely robotic race 99% of people will either think Matrix or Terran, and having the backstory dependent on AI doesn't help that (just look at how many backstories you have given are of this race being created by Terran).

    I guess I haven't really read everything here, but thats just my first impression (will continue to read tho).

    EDIT:

    OOOH! Just thought of a really cool way to make the race so unique. All units are built out of upgrades from previous units (in a branching tree), so you can build the highest tier unit from the lowest tier unit whenever you want (but its going to be a very long build time). In order to build higher tier units faster, you would have to build an attachment onto a tier 1, 2, or 3 production building (up to 3? attachments per building) that would make that building able to produce that unit, a bit like a tech lab on a terran building. This would cut out the intermediate steps in building higher tier units through the tree, thus decreasing build time.

    So basically, you can either go the route of build some tier one buildings and specialize them, building crappy units, then build some tier 2 buildings and specialize, building moderate units, etc... Or you can build some crappy units, upgrade em individually, then when they finish upgrade em again, and again.

    You had better have a purpose for this army however, as if it dies its going to take a long time (but not more resources) to build again. The upside is that you sink less resources in your production buildings (could be op, but easily balanced), get high tier units slightly faster (also could be seen as op, but really isnt considering how few units you would have), and have the ability to throw in units of a different tech path whenever you want.

    Edit 2: If I'm really late on the bandwagon here, I apologize (I haven't really gotten a sense of how much actual work in the editor you guys have done).

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on New multiplayer units (clarification)

    Just checking, the new multiplayer units are the hellion morph, the swarm host, and the tempest right? The other 6 are just for the campaign? I've seen a lot of rage about how Terran is getting the razor blades of death to all zerg, but that isn't going to be in multiplayer is it?

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Drinking Sc2

    If you need ideas, just take all of the normal sc2 in game achievements. They happen often enough.

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on New HotS Protoss unit revealed (Finally)

    I have found carriers to be fairly useless. They are just too slow to kite properly. At least this way zerg will stop going mutalisk vs protoss. Oh wait, they dont... Why is this any better than the carrier?

    On a side note, I thought motherships were actually a very good unit. While most people didn't use them, I feel like the teleporting skill was quite useful for base sniping and vortex was just horribly op in general (for positioning). Oh well.

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on New HoTS Zerg unit revealed

    If they are going to start allowing hydraroaches I personally want to see some hydralisks riding ontop of ultralisks. Elephant archer ne1?

    In all seriousness though, its a baneling not a hydra or roach. Roach has another set of legs and its teeth are completely different. While the hydra teeth look right, so do the baneling teeth and judging by the fact that it has the same number of legs as a baneling, I'm going to lock in my answer now.

    That said, could be an evolution of zergling (as an alternative to banelings).

    If Blizzard has been smart they will be making this unit to increase options for zerg in all matchups. This probably means that this unit will be effective vs roaches (to reduce roach in zvz), not that effective vs marines (to keep roach it zvt), and decently effective vs gateway units (to reduce roach slightly in zvp). Which kindof comes down to a ranged anti-armor unit. To keep it different from immortal and marauder (and prevent it being useless in air rush situations), it will probably be able to attack air.

    Or it might be a bunker buster. Pray its a bunker buster. But then what does it do vs protoss?

    I seriously doubt they will make it have attack/move modes. Too similar to siege tank (and they have stated that they want to make every unit unique). Although maybe a fast attack mode and slow armor mode would be ok (for crawling towards a bunker or tank and then opening up to attack). Would be really kiteable, so only really useful for attacking bases.

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Looking for a lighting/fog editor for my map (Ender's Battleroom)

    Ah, yeah. Probably should be moved. I just thought "I need terrain" and went straight to the terrain forum.

    Posted in: Team Recruitment
  • 0

    posted a message on Looking for a lighting/fog editor for my map (Ender's Battleroom)

    Hi, I'm making a map based on the book Ender's Game, and I have an issue where there really aren't any doodads/interesting things i can use to "eye candify" my map. Someone in my thread over in the project workplace suggested I work with lighting and fog, but I really have no experience with that stuff and would rather not devote the time to learning (having enough trouble finding enough time to bugfix as it is).

    Heres a video of the map (it seems way brighter than it does on my comp, so its not entirely accurate). As you can see, it is very boring looking.

    If anyone knows how to use the editor and would like to help out by making a map with extremely simple terrain look nice (or at least slightly less awful), please reply or send me a pm.

    Posted in: Team Recruitment
  • 0

    posted a message on Ender's Battleroom

    Alright, I now have a super-sweet loading screen tutorial (spliced together from screen shots in Paint). And the glitching out of the map should be fixed (how many times have i said that?). Complex maneuvers still have a slight issue, but they appear to work for the most part.

    Edit: lol, tried to fix a minor bug and made a super major one (you can shoot while dead). Also, unit grabbing seems to suck due to latency (ie, people are paired up several inches from eachother).

    Edit2: fixed the whole dead unit shooting stuff... Not sure how latency is working, but i do know that there was a massive bug in that you couldn't control yourself if you got paired with someone and then depaired. Fixed that at least. Did find a bug in the round system not working properly... Score still increments, but round doesn't reset.

    Posted in: Project Workplace
  • 0

    posted a message on Why does this not work?

    The one where you described multiplication perfectly, claiming it was division, and had someone tell u that u just described multiplication.

    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Why does this not work?

    1: you bumped this for no reason. I already stated I found my error (a simple missclick).

    2: No.

    3: I must have gotten confused because its difficult to picture taking the arctan of baskets and apples. Btw, that one guy's response to u made my day (to other observers, go read the patch 1.4 is out... thread).

    Posted in: General Chat
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.