Republic Units for SWGB2 - Poll

[Darth Windu]

Games that have generic buildings-

1. Command & Conquer

2. Command & Conquer: Red Alert

3. Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun

4. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2

5. Age of Empires

6. Age of Empires: Age of Kings

7. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds

8. Rise of Nations

 

and that's just off the top of my head. The games listed there all had generic buildings and are listed at the greatest RTS' of all time! As i have previously said, totally unique unit and building sets are unrealistic, unrequired and unsuitable for a game like SWGB2.

 

With the units i agree that it should be predominantly unique units BUT sometimes, like in the case of the Worker and Trooper, it is unnecessary and undesirable, instead generic units WITH MULTIPLIERS are a lot better.

[CorranSec]

I'm getting a strange feeling of deja vu. I think we've already been through how every unit, down to the simple workers/basic troopers, can be unique.

As Luke said, look at StarCraft. The Marine was a pretty cheap unit, with medium range and decent damage- best in groups. It didn't really have any special abilities. The Hydralisk cost more, with a longer range, better attack, and Burrowing if the ability is researched. Like all other Zerg, it slowly regenerates health. The Zealot cost even more (about 250 crystal thingys and 100 gas thingys if I recall?), has a very powerful hand-to-hand attack, plus (like all Protoss) is outfitted with recharging shields.

StarCraft's workers. Zerg Drones gathered resources and had to 'morph' into buildings (sacrifice themselves to form the building). Protoss Probes 'warped' in completed buildings, which means that they just had to start the warp and could then go and do other stuff. Terran SUVs (I think that's the name... ^^) were your typical everyday worker seen in many games, which had to sit around constructing a building.

The same went for many other things that you would leave as generic. Everything was unique in SC, and even basic concerns such as pop limits were dealt with in a different way by each civ.

 

I know this is only one example. But let's look at your list of examples. 1 to 7 are all old games, plus all the C&Cs had many unique elements (you didn't see NOD with Gap Generators or GDF with Flamethrowers, did you)? And now look at where each series is going. The next C&C installment, Command and Conquer: Generals, features 3 totally unique civilisations- China, USA, and the Global Liberation Army. The next AoE, Age of Mythology, is the same. Galactic Battlegrounds is in the same boat as AoK (considering they're rather alike) and as for RoN... well, chalk up another point against it. A supposedly new, groundbreaking game and it can't do something that the very first C&C did- namely, have unique civs.

 

Unrealistic? Is it realistic that Gungans build their underwater cities and Yuuzhan Vong grow their living structures with a construction droid armed with welders, just like the Republic? I don't think so.

Unrequired? Depends on what you're aiming for. If you're aiming for a small-ante game, which won't be all that good at all, then sure, uniqueness is unrequired. Good graphics are unrequired. A good storyline is unrequired. But we should be aiming for a top-of-the-line game, and we know that unique unit sets are achievable.

Unsuitable? See above on 'Unrealistic'. I can't think of what could be more suitable, considering the huge diversity of species and civilisations, all with their own buildings and armies, within the Star Wars universe. I also can't think of what could be more suitable for a top-of-the-line game. Which is what we're aiming for.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Corran- Amen! And it's Terran SCV and Zealots only costs 100 crystal.

[Sithmaster_821]

Actually the only mainstreamRTS game that has come out in the past year that used generic buildings/units was RoN

Games that have generic buildings-

1. Command & Conquer

2. Command & Conquer: Red Alert

3. Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun

4. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2

5. Age of Empires

6. Age of Empires: Age of Kings

7. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds

8. Rise of Nations

How many of those came out in the past year and are not RoN? In fact, as Corran pointed out, most of those games have sequels that came out in the past year and had unique civs/buildings

[Darth Windu]

How many civs does C&C: Generals have?

How many civs does Starcraft have?

 

BTW dont use starcraft examples on me, ive never played it.

 

Also, remember that GAMEPLAY > REALISM, and 100% unique units are neither required or wanted. I would bet any amount of money any game designer would agree with me in the case of a game as complex as SWGB2 is in my idea, and with 8 civs.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by Darth Windu

1.How many civs does C&C: Generals have?

How many civs does Starcraft have?

 

2.BTW dont use starcraft examples on me, ive never played it.

 

3.Also, remember that GAMEPLAY > REALISM, and 100% unique units are neither required or wanted. I would bet any amount of money any game designer would agree with me in the case of a game as complex as SWGB2 is in my idea, and with 8 civs.

 

1. It's an old game with nothing to based upon and so does C&C general. SWGB has the whole SW universe which it can take stuff from and create more.

 

2. Shame on you!

 

3. Yes they are wanted and for the game's success they are required. like in 1. SWGB has the whole SW universe and more. C&C does not and StarCraft did not.

[Sithmaster_821]

Don't worry Windu, you didnt miss out on much. Just Warcraft 3 with better gameplay, but worse graphics and pathing.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by Sithmaster_821

Don't worry Windu, you didnt miss out on much. Just Warcraft 3 with better gameplay, but worse graphics and pathing.

 

He missed the best game story and campaigns ever! And some good cinematics(not the briefings just the cinematics). It's still the best selling RTS of all times.

[Sithmaster_821]

Sorry Luke, but as the resident Blizzard hater I felt obliged to say something...

[lukeiamyourdad]

well I'm not a fan of the rest of blizzard's game...actually StarCraft was the first computer game I played...

[CorranSec]

1. StarCraft is an old game. C&C Generals didn't want to reach or push the mark, and although it is nonetheless a fun game, it is not the pinnacle.

2. I know you've never played StarCraft, and thus I took the time to painstakingly explain quite a lot of the game features.

3. You say Gameplay>Realism, and yet you

a) used "Unrealistic" as an argument, and

b) need I say the cursed word 'Gunship'? Oops, I just did.

Now Gameplay>Realism is all fine and good, and I doubt that there is anyone on these forums who would come straight out and say 'Realism>Gameplay.' But the fact remains that although we all tote this adage, we continue to argue about units. So it is clear that there are degrees of Gameplay>Realism. Let me lay out what we should be aiming for.

 

Gameplay>Realism means that Gameplay is more important than Realism. This was originally created in Sith's battle against the Gunship, which (being inspired by the films) was basically a Realism idea. Gameplay>Realism worked well against the original Gunship idea because, as we all realise, it would not have fit in the original SWGB and although it would have improved realism it would also have messed up the balance, thus making gameplay worse all-round.

Gameplay>Realism has since been used in many arguments on these forums. Basically, when it's used, we're saying that taking elements from the films/books/etc, creating units out of them and trying to fit them into the game with no regard for balance is a bad thing. By the same token, not including things simply because they do not perfectly fit with realism is also bad. Examples include a Gunship that could carry many Clones and had both unit-killing lasers and one-hit-building-killing-missiles, attempting to fit in Luke Skywalker as close to the movies as possible (and thus sporting a huge array of Force powers), and putting full-size Star Destroyers in the Empire's arsenal.

 

BUT!

 

Realism is still to be respected, in that this game is still Star Wars, and Star Wars already has many established conventions and units which would make excellent source material. As such, something that is Un-Star-Wars-ish enough to make a mockery of the whole thing (such as a Greek spear or a Boeing 747) should not be in the game. Realism should be strived for, but can be put aside when gameplay is at stake. This explains why we want to have TIE Fighters and X-Wings, not POW Fighters and H-Wings, which are things that I just made up.

This also explains why we want to have TIE Fighters that are quite different to X-Wings and different again to N-1 Starfighters, instead of them all being identical except for looks and a couple of bonuses which apply to a generic base.

 

Got all that?

Now, if you observe above, I am confused as to how you, Windu, hope to use Gameplay>Realism in your favour. You have failed to point out how the mere proposition of unique unit sets would have a detrimental effect on gameplay, instead using unproven thoughts such as 'It just won't be possible' and looking to old games for reasons why we should simply abandon pursuit of a good game.

 

I hope you all enjoyed my rhetoric. Now, as a reward, I am going to go and eat a damned lot of pizza. Thankyou.

[Sithmaster_821]

Thank you for typing out a long explination of Gameplay>Realism. You deserve the pizza. This is one of the most misused quote on these forums. You hit it roughly on the mark.

 

Just a point, I didn't make up the phrase, Greg Street did when he was justifying including Elephants in the Mythic..er..Imperial age, even though they went out of use in Persia in the 7th century during my AoK days. He had a better, albeit longer, quote during AoM's development concerning Gameplay>Realism:

 

"Anything that gets in the way of gameplay will be blindfolded, taken out side, and summarily shot."

[lukeiamyourdad]

I'm gonna be an ass and say we need greek spears and Boeing 747...as cheat units:p .

[CorranSec]

Sith: Thankyou. It was some very good pizza.

 

Luke: Your ass-ness is entirely justified. Greek spears may indeed turn out to be one of the best cheats in the game. It's right up there next to the flying space monkeys.

And as for Boeing 747s, well, the potential is just limitless. They could be transports, they could have lasers mounted on them, and as a last resort, you could fly them into your opponents' buildings!

.... on second thoughts...

*cringe*

[Darth Windu]

Corran - i understand the concept of gameplay>realism, although i tend to be closer to the middle of the spectrum than others like sithy.

 

I would also like to point out that 100% unique units will hurt gameplay because it will have to use up more resources from the computer than generic units with multipliers would, and the effect would be the same. Also note that the portion of units i propose this for is rather limited, and the majority are unique.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Everybody believes it's gonna be in 2005 Windu...2005. If you're gonna have a computer below 1.0GHz you better not complaint 'cause that's gonna be the minimal requirement(probably a bit more) for most recent games. even now it's the recommended processor speed. You're gonna have to deal with it. No one is gonna wait for a few persons to upgrade their comp.

[Indy#1Fan]

Lets just say that Jango Fetts flame thrower is very cool and hos clones should have one.

 

BURN BABY BURN!!!!!!

[The Cheat]

i think they should just get all of them

[Darth Windu]

luke - i've had a 1.3Ghz processor for a few years now. What im saying though is that THERE WOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE in reagrds to these units being generic with mulipliers or unique. Also, having the units generic with multipliers will free up MORE computer power to have better graphics, smoother gameplay etc and allow more people to enjoy the game.

 

Where is the problem?

[CorranSec]

1. We cannot base assessments and make conclusions about what computers will be like in 2005. What you're aiming for, Windu, was achievable a couple of years ago, when AoK came out. What I'm aiming for is achievable now, but will be even more achievable during the next couple of years.

Your argument sounds like Joe's feeble protest- "I hope GB2 has generic unit sets because I do not have a very good video card and I would have to buy a new one to play the game." Honestly, people... I don't even know what to say. There can be no response to such willful indifference. Perhaps it's simply Joe being overly protective of his money, but it should be clear to all sane people that if you want great games several years in the future, you're going to have to fork out money to get them. You probably would have spent money on upgrading your system for earlier before GB2 comes out anyway, in the same way that people who upgraded their system for WC3 can now enjoy RoN even more (although the degree of enjoyment provided by that game, even to those with amazing systems, is doubtful at best).

 

2. I am finding it hard to believe what I see on my screen. Do you honestly believe that there will be no difference between generic units with multipliers and fully unique units? Once again, I find myself lost for words.

Consider the following:

a) The basic stats for a fighter are 10 damage, 2 armor, 50 health and 7 speed. The Imperials get the artwork of a TIE fighter, with modifiers of -3 damage, and +2 speed. The Rebels get an X-Wing, which has the basic stats (and is what the other ships are built upon). This is quite similar to the model used by GB1.

b) With unique unit sets, the Imperials (at their Shipyard) build a TIE Fighter. It does low damage with fast-firing lasers, is fast but weak, and gets an aura buff when in groups. The Rebels build an X-Wing at their Fighter Docks, which does high damage, can fire a proton torpedo (secondary weapon) is fairly slow and thus less manuverable, but has solid armour and medium health.

 

It's easy to see how B is better, if not by the basic numbers then by imagining it in your head.

And here's another point, Windu. If there is no difference between unique and generic sets, then why would unique sets take up more processing power? You've just defeated your own argument. Congratulations. Have some pizza.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Hahaha... Windu if you want some old generic games just go back to those old games. The way of the future is unique.

[Darth Windu]

corran - i actually had pizza last night, wasnt too bad but it was kinda cold.

 

Anyway that problem with what you just said is that there is a greater difference in your example between generic and unique. What im trying to tell you is that in my idea, the stats would be the same (whether the units were generic with multipliers or unique). Hence the only thing left is computer power. I'm not saying that its impossible to have 100% unique units, what i am saying is that there is no need for it, and with SOME generic units with multipliers, the game would run more smoothly and allow more people to enjoy the game.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Then windu what's the point in having ''some'' generic unit when you can have a completely unique set? if you really want to save comp power then have them all generic with like one or two uniques. Having half the units generic and the other half unique is just dumb and by the way no one has ever done that because people would enjooy a game with 100% unique sets more then something halfway through.

LA must stop nurturing those with old comps or anything. I mean I only have a 1.3 GHz but I'm planning on getting a new processor. If you're so worried about that do that same thing go get yourself a damn new processor. Don't tell me that with a 2.0GHz and + you're not gonna have smooth gameplay.

[JediMasterEd]

I have a 2.0GHz processor and several games run skippy...I think though it's just my SDRAM...it's 256 and I was told that since my SDRAM was from DELL, since it's a DELL system, any other memory chipset wouldn't work.

 

There are many that still have the old PIII's and not many gaiming corps. would want to create a game where it's over 1.5 GHz with it's recommended, save some really graphic games, when I mean graphic, I mean details galor.

[Admiral Vostok]

Windu, in 2005 computers should be able to handle 7 or 8 unique civs. Besides, having mixed generic/unique unit sets isn't going to save any processing power over totally unique sets. Most of the processing is taken up by the graphics, for which you'll have the same amount whether generic or unique. The hard part about unique units is the programming behind them when compared to generic units. But this won't affect your processing speed. So I don't know what you're on about.