Jump to content

Home

Official SWGB 2 GB.com Thread


Guest DarthMaulUK

Recommended Posts

With the 'good and bad' comment, i was refering to the personality of the civs, not gameplay.

 

With the broadband issue, i dont like it. Although i have access to broadband if i want it, its very expensive, and im not going to pay over double what im paying at the moment just to play SWGB2 on the net.

 

With 'no rush' RoN uses attrition (your units taking damae automatically) to deter players from breaking the 'no rush' rule (if you broke it, your units would die)

 

With storyline, whay does it need to change? Just look at Rogue Leader. Basically, it is just Rogue Squadron with better graphics and more options, although i would like a Naboo campaign in SWGB2.

 

Vostok - not a bad idea, although id like to have jedi in my army aswell.

 

Finally, with the jedi thing, i think it would be nice to have force powers in the game, giving jedi a rather limited ranged attack, although of course the trade off would be much higher cost/build time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 720
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest DarthMaulUK
Originally posted by StarWarsPhreak

That would work too. I think the zone sucks now. With all those hacks and stuff. They need a server thing like AoM. You go through the game menus and get to Multiplayer.

 

 

I can assure you that SWGB 2 will NOT be played on the MSN Zone.

 

DMUK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broadband....... ah, broadband.

I don't have broadband. (hears snickers, even over here in Australia) Hey!

But by the time the game DOES come out, as someone else said, most gamers who actually do want to play good multiplayer will have broadband. So yes, 3D is a good idea.

 

Rushing..... ah, rushing.

Some people rush. Some people don't rush. Some people hate the people who do rush (predominantly, the people who don't rush). But no matter what your opinion is, rushing still is and should be a viable strategy. Games like RoN which basically force you not to rush, the Craft games which basically rule out defense and so on are all not covering all fields.

A game which will allow any kind of strategy for any kind of player will rule. About n00bs... well, we were all n00bs, and some of us probably got smashed by rushers or whatever, but we're alive.

 

Jedi should still be a part of your army. Bounty Hunters I can understand being uncontrollable, but Jedi (especially in the days of the Old Republic) do follow orders and go into battle.

 

The Zone. Argh, I must go wash my mouth out now.

I think we can all agree on the Z- argh, mustn't say the blasphemous name! Er.. THAT issue at least.

 

SWPhreak- If you'd looked around, you could see that there are all kinds of ideas for new units, civs, etc. Not so much about the storyline, but if you want to think of something, go ahead.

 

Gavan- Look above, there's plenty of reasons why RoN would be terribly bad for GB 2. And all you've shown are graphical reasons and no particular point as to why GB2 would rock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good post CorranSec.

 

You are right about the Jedi being controllable, especially in the Republic. Thinking about it more the best example of the way Jedi work for civs other than Republic is Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan in the Phantom Menace fighting for the Royal Naboo. And they still followed the Queen's orders. So I take back the thing about uncontrollable Jedi. But uncontrollable Bounty Hunters is still an okay idea.

 

And yes, the fact is that people who are serious about having a good multiplayer game via the net will most likely already have broadband, or will at least be willing to get it when a magnificent multiplayer game is released.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:deathii: Using an existing game engine for SWGB 2 would be a terrible mistake. We want an original game, not a total conversion of an existing one.

 

:deathii: The new Star Wars RTS has to be more "Star Wars-y", with space battles, and more "star wars-y" units (not units like pummels and cannons).

 

:deathii: The civs need to have more differences (i.e. like Starcraft)

 

:deathii: The new engine have to be 3D. 2D engines, have many limits in making space battles and dogfightings which are the main kind of battles in SW movies. I don't understand why some of you don't want a 3D engine. It's the future of RTS games. 2D RTS will be dead in 1-2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have already seen thier own engine.;)

 

Agreed about the space battles but just Star Warsy units just don't offer enough potential. Let's list the Empire's units then, shall we?

Stormtroopers/Snowtroopers

TIE Fighters

TIE Bombers

Officers

AT-AT's

AT-ST's

Star Destroyers

Super Star Destroyers

Speeder Bike Scouts

Navy Troopers

That's only 10 units. Pummels and artillery increase the number of tactics the player can use.

 

Completely different civs would be hard to learn for newbs. They should be moderately different, while most units would be generic. It's also hard to balance. Overpowered civs frequently appear.

 

Agreed on a 3d engine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with crazy. Why aren't pummels "star-wars-y"? Or cannons? They look like nothing earth could create---at least in looks. And broadband--i didn't even know what that means. I am skeptical that it will replace everything else in a while.

 

I wasn’t aware the zone was useless now. Sure there are too many scenarios. But we should be grateful we have the zone to play multiplayer games at all. There are still enough players to start an rm game with. But a gb server would be ok with me.

 

Now, let's again try to decide what the pop. limit should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pummels and Cannons are not Star Wars-y. I define this by the fact that no-one in the movies has anything similar.

 

I think Artillery is valid, as the Gungan Catapult definitely falls into this category. I also think that Cannons would be more Star Wars-y if they shot a direct beam like the SPHA-Ts in Episode II.

 

This is how I see things... SWGB2 should not be totally canon units, but should at least not have units that go AGAINST the style of war seen in the movies (pummels, destroyers). If you want more varied units, play SWGB1. If you want a more authentic Star Wars feel, play SWGB2.

 

Personally I think if we just loose the pummel things would be a whole lot more Star-Warsy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed about the pummels and cannons. As we have seen time and time again, battles in Star Wars are all about mobility, and to have some equipment which requires unpacking slows you down and would give your opponent ample opportunity to smash your forces.

 

Also, with the pummels, they should never have been put in a Star Wars game. If, as we see in ep5, equipment such as the AT-AT can shatter large buildings with long range guns, why would you want a slow (and extremely vunerable) anti-building melee unit? Also ask yourself why something like the pummel was never used in WW2 (which is what SW combat is based on)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevertheless, on the whole topic of unique/generic units:

I agree that we should still keep the classes- 'troopers,' 'mechs,' etc, but it's quite possible to make the units as unique as possible without destroying the classes.

Example. An Imperial player builds an Imperial Fighter Production Yard (aka airbase). At the yard, the player selects from the production options to build a TIE Fighter. This is a speedy and cheap yet fragile and weak space superiority fighter.

The Rebels build a Rebel Fighter Airbase. Here, they build an X-Wing, a space superiority fighter slower and more expensive than a TIE but sturdier and does more damage.

You see? They're both 'space superiority fighters' (aka the typical all-round fighter) and they're both in the 'fighter' class, but they are still unique in many ways.

How does this sound?

 

About the 'non-SW' units. Although I do see some of your points (especially about the pummels), we should be prepared to sacrifice 'star warsy-ness' for better strategy and gameplay.

And Windu, SW battles aren't necessarily about mobility. The Battle of Hoth was mostly fixed defenders vs. giant slow-moving AT-ATs. In the movies, Star Destroyers were generally just giant turrets, never actively pursuing enemies, but they were still incredibly powerful.

 

And please, Windu. Do not start on your whole "aah, but SW is just like real life, cos it was based on real wars, etc. etc." thing. It's incorrect, irritating and idiotic. (No offense, I needed another thing that started with 'i'...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cannons were used in star wars starfighter-----big things that unpack and fire from extreme range. I know a cannon could not be recognizable like an AT-AT. But as long as most of the units are star wars, i don't care because these units are strategically balanced.

 

Maybe you would want this unit because it must use nearly impenatrable armor and is cheap compared to the assault mechs at 150 C and 75 N.

 

Pummels are also the only extreme destructive building land unit in t3--no artillery, cannnons, no at-ats. Its close combat has freak atvantages. You can kill artillery with it (it works kind of fast).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okey-day, been gone for like a week (did you miss me?) :)

 

LA is pissed at the Zone. We're pissed at the Zone. The Zone's pissed at everyone. Rest assured LA wont touch the Zone with a ten foot pole in SWGB2.

 

Windu, the "good" civs aren't all bad at mechs/heavies. Ever try the Wookies or the Gungans? RoN will not make a good engine, get over it. It is a game for all those people that go and complain that no one told them that RTS's weren't like SimCity, and war is optional, so of course they will have no rushing, cause rushing only works in games where attacking works.

 

Cities: They should be like settlements in AoM. Add to pop cap once you renovate them. Then they act as town centers/bases, ect.

 

Storyline: Considering that SWGB was made roughly for the ES side of the RTS spectrum, and seeing that ES makes their campaigns of the games, unlike Blizzard who makes their games off their campaigns, they probably won't talk much about the storyline while developing the game

 

Force Powers should be done at set intervals, i.e. A jedi will hack troopers up for a while and then, every 15 secs, they should throw a trooper/heal themselves/electrucute their opponent, ect.

They should also be civ specific

 

There shouldnt be more civs

 

Rushing is required if you want this game to be played by anyone but noobs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sithmaster_821

(1)Okey-day, been gone for like a week (did you miss me?) :)

 

(2)LA is pissed at the Zone. We're pissed at the Zone. The Zone's pissed at everyone. Rest assured LA wont touch the Zone with a ten foot pole in SWGB2.

 

(3)Windu, the "good" civs aren't all bad at mechs/heavies. Ever try the Wookies or the Gungans? RoN will not make a good engine, get over it. It is a game for all those people that go and complain that no one told them that RTS's weren't like SimCity, and war is optional, so of course they will have no rushing, cause rushing only works in games where attacking works.

 

(4)Cities: They should be like settlements in AoM. Add to pop cap once you renovate them. Then they act as town centers/bases, ect.

 

(5)Storyline: Considering that SWGB was made roughly for the ES side of the RTS spectrum, and seeing that ES makes their campaigns of the games, unlike Blizzard who makes their games off their campaigns, they probably won't talk much about the storyline while developing the game

 

(6)Force Powers should be done at set intervals, i.e. A jedi will hack troopers up for a while and then, every 15 secs, they should throw a trooper/heal themselves/electrucute their opponent, ect.

They should also be civ specific

 

(7)There shouldnt be more civs

 

(8)Rushing is required if you want this game to be played by anyone but noobs

 

1- no one missed you man! go away we don'T want to see you again!;) (joke)

 

2-Exactly

 

3-If they want a SimCity a la Star Wars. Go make one.

 

4-Check the Cities thread

 

5-They still need to think about it. Hiring actors and everything. They need to think about it! And besides a good story makes a game more popular.

 

6- Too random

 

7-Yes there should

 

8-We all start as newbs and learn from our defeats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rushing is a viable strategy. I'm not saying I like rushing, I don't. I like turtling, which many other people don't like. But either are valid and should not be discarded.

 

And I'm not saying no non-canon units. I'm saying they are fine as long as they don't go against the way Star Wars warfare is waged. Pummels go against this, and I'm of two minds with Cannons. The SPHA-Ts certainly remind me of cannons except with a straight beam. But back to pummels, they aren't what Star Wars armies use.

 

However, I wouldn't be entirely against keeping either the Gungan pummel or the Wookiee pummel. I think the Gungan pummel fits in nicely with the Gungan's style of warfare, and as we haven't seen any of the Wookiee's style of warfare, we could feasibly give them a pummel. However, the rest of the civs would not use a pummel in a seige.

 

And I totally entirely completely 100% agree there should NOT be more civs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sith, Luke's dad:

1) I really didn't notice. :D

2) Agreed. Hopefully they'll get their own (swbattle.net, anyone?)

3) Aye.

4) Maybe (is there a medieval term for maybe?)

5) I wouldn't promote anything totally blizzard (aka focussed on campaigns), but you have to admit blizzard makes some of the best if not THE best campaigns out there. And thus, LA (or ES, or whoever) should indeed learn from them, and try to make the campaigns a damned lot better.

6) Er... sounds like a good start, but I'd in fact prefer something more random OR controllable. With this, you'll get a mob of jedi, tell them all to attack a building at the same time... they'll all start hacking with their sabers... and then 15 seconds later, every single one of them heals themselves. Even though they don't need healing.

Or, a Sith might be hacking at a big mech, and after 15 seconds (when the mech's health is very low, eg. 30) the jedi decides to release a 300-damage focussed lightning blast at the mech. Total overkill.

Wouldn't a more micro-heavy solution be better?

7) More civs is not only beneficial, it's downright necessary. GB had a small number of civs, and to make it worse, they're generic. GB2 should have a rather larger number of civs, and to make it better, they should have large elements of unique-ness.

Why shouldn't there be more?

8) Aye. All strategies should be allowed, thus making the game better for all types of players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...