StarCraft: Remastered

[ArchAngel]

Sc2 big deathballs have nothing to do with unlimited selection but with new pathfinding that lets you easily move like that. Also with resources being collected faster and all players getting to higher supply numbers faster.

That's actually complete bullshit. Deathballs exist precisely because of unlimited selection and easily exploitable move-attack mechanics.

I don't agree and I explained why.

 

[ArchAngel]

By deathball I mean a single army group, when you'd need 4 or 5 groups in BW. Moving armies in both games is extremely different even without taking pathfinding in consideration. It's just far easier in SC2 and thus requires less effort. People used 1a2a3a jokingly for army attacks, but in SC2 you just need 1a. I don't see unlimited selection as a pro and it makes the game super boring to me and far less impressive to watch. Also right now there are quite a lot of viewers for BW in Korea, with three recent and very successful BW tournaments broadcasted on AfreecaTV.

You were also saying that no one would go from SC2 to BW, but SoulKey ditched SC2 (and his very successful career) to play BW instead and is an absolute beast at the moment, managing to beat the best BW players.

1a works only for some army compositions. And I would say it works more because of smartcasting than unlimited selection. And Soulkey has nothing to do with what I am talking about.
I am pretty sure if BWHD exists and if it has changes to UI it will also have a classic mode that will be for korean pros and pro scene because I am sure Kespa would not go along with BWHD if it didn't have that.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Could easily add automining to BW as is, unlimited unit selection and MBS with slight adjustments. Smartcasting, not so much, too many powerful spells are balanced by not being easy to spam.

These changes would completely break the game. Even putting the resolution in widescreen instead of 4:3 would dramatically change how the game is played, since you can see more. The only change I'd accept would be auto-mining with rally points.
There's a reason why pros still play this game to this day and why SC2 has declined so fast.

Please explain how unlimited unit selection and MBS would break the game, with specific examples from specific matchups. "It's not as easy to win on superior macro alone" is not the game being broken, just FYI.

Only thing I can think of is that cracklings may be too powerful without the awkwardness of them taking up so many control groups. Zerg in general would become relatively easier to play, as a lot of their inherent difficulty came down to macroing off of hatches you couldn't easily place close to each other. But other than that? Nothing much would change.

Sc2 big deathballs have nothing to do with unlimited selection but with new pathfinding that lets you easily move like that. Also with resources being collected faster and all players getting to higher supply numbers faster.

That's actually complete bullshit. Deathballs exist precisely because of unlimited selection and easily exploitable move-attack mechanics.

So, you actually believe SC2 wouldn't have deathballs if it didn't also have unlimited selection?

 

[skacky]

Unlimited unit selection and MBS would radically change the game. It's not something I'm pulling out of my ass, it's the truth. You're adding/modifying mechanics that weren't in the original that would completely change the way the game is played, creating new strategies and rendering others completely useless. It's not a good thing to do for a game that is 18 years old and is played by people who know everything there is to know about it and still come up with interesting tactics. It's just like if you changed chess so you can move all your pieces at once. MBS would allow players to create units en masse without having to manage their base at all except for building additional structures or assigning building to groups. You'd see a swift switch to micro management instead of the great balance between micro and macro that's in BW and that makes it so exciting.

Unlimited unit selection would make moments of panic much rarer and less prone to mistakes. This is when you see if a player is really good or not. Being able to control only 12 units per group has a huge impact when you're caught off-guard and have to retreat or move to another position. You have to move all your units the best you can to avoid heavy casualties. With unlimited selection you can just 1move and be done with it. Marine & Medic armies would move far more efficiently with unlimited selection and you would also be able to stim all your Marines at once instead of having to actually select them group by group and then stimming. Zerg players who play with Lurkers sometimes count on the Terran player to mess up moving their units out of the spines range. Same goes for Reaver drops into worker lines. You often have more than 12 workers in a base. Select them all and move them away and the Reaver attack is far less threatening all of a sudden. Psi Storms? Just move your whole army away from them instead of having to micro the units actually caught in the storm, which requires effort. While you're not micromanaging the rest of your army, the opponent could land another storm and you wouldn't have time to react. Storms behave rather differently in SC2 and are much faster to compensate for the unlimited selection. And also, like you said, MBS + unlimited selection would make Zerglings unstoppable unless there are massive balance changes, which would further change the game.

Also deathballs in themselves are not the problem. There are deathballs in BW as well. The crucial difference between the two however is that you can't move your deathball as one entity in BW while you can in SC2.

 

[ArchAngel]

Unlimited unit selection and MBS would radically change the game. It's not something I'm pulling out of my ass, it's the truth. You're adding/modifying mechanics that weren't in the original that would completely change the way the game is played, creating new strategies and rendering others completely useless. It's not a good thing to do for a game that is 18 years old and is played by people who know everything there is to know about it and still come up with interesting tactics. It's just like if you changed chess so you can move all your pieces at once. MBS would allow players to create units en masse without having to manage their base at all except for building additional structures or assigning building to groups. You'd see a swift switch to micro management instead of the great balance between micro and macro that's in BW and that makes it so exciting.

Unlimited unit selection would make moments of panic much rarer and less prone to mistakes. This is when you see if a player is really good or not. Being able to control only 12 units per group has a huge impact when you're caught off-guard and have to retreat or move to another position. You have to move all your units the best you can to avoid heavy casualties. With unlimited selection you can just 1move and be done with it. Marine & Medic armies would move far more efficiently with unlimited selection and you would also be able to stim all your Marines at once instead of having to actually select them group by group and then stimming. Zerg players who play with Lurkers sometimes count on the Terran player to mess up moving their units out of the spines range. Same goes for Reaver drops into worker lines. You often have more than 12 workers in a base. Select them all and move them away and the Reaver attack is far less threatening all of a sudden. Psi Storms? Just move your whole army away from them instead of having to micro the units actually caught in the storm, which requires effort. While you're not micromanaging the rest of your army, the opponent could land another storm and you wouldn't have time to react. Storms behave rather differently in SC2 and are much faster to compensate for the unlimited selection. And also, like you said, MBS + unlimited selection would make Zerglings unstoppable unless there are massive balance changes, which would further change the game.

Also deathballs in themselves are not the problem. There are deathballs in BW as well. The crucial difference between the two however is that you can't move your deathball as one entity in BW while you can in SC2.

Oh I am sure it would change the game, but it would change it for the better for average players. As I said before, if Blizzard invested money into making BWHD it needs to make changes that will make people want to play it and have fun while playing it. Average players will not have fun with archaic UI limitations of BW.

And for pros maybe classic mode will be made available.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

for average players.

Instead of ruining the game to cater to casual compstomping retards like you, the average player should just learn to play instead.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

You people have the same discussion every day in just about every other part of this website about how dumbing down RPGs to cater to retard casuals is the decline, yet whenever you morons talk about RTSes you talk about how dumbing the genre down for retard casuals is a net positive and even use a lot of the same dumb arguments e.g. the systems are too hard for normies to learn, the graphics hurt my eyes, BUT THE UI, etc etc.

"Let's remaster Fallout 1/2... by making them into Fallout 3!" is the equivalent of what half of you people are saying and there's absolutely no way of arguing around this.

 

[ArchAngel]

for average players.

Instead of ruining the game to cater to casual compstomping retards like you, the average player should just learn to play instead.

And they will but not by using retarded archaic UI.

 

[MRY]

This may be a dumb question -- it's been decades since my Brood War obsessive days -- but wouldn't unlimited selection be catastrophic without changing the way pathfinding works? In SC/BW, rather than each unit in a selection seeking a point offset from the the cursor based on its current formation as is done in SC2 (which allows them to "flock"), all the units try to walk to the same spot and then give up if they can't reach it (causing them to funnel into a straight line). Anyone who played BW went through the experience of being sad that zerglings couldn't flock/swarm the way the bugs do in Starship Troopers, and then you got on with life. Flocking was approximated to some degree, though, by forcing the player to move large armies in groups, since the player would pick different destination points. If you moved the whole army via a single selection and used the old pathfiding, the result would be an insanity of single-file delays and juddering movement.

However, if you also added more intelligent moving, you'd completely transform the strategy/balance of the game because the balance presumed a certain measure of ineffectiveness in large groups. Also, some abilities like lurker spines were more effective precisely because of the single-file movement.

The game might be better if it were entirely rebalanced around MBS/unlimited selection/intelligent movement, but at that point you're not talking about an HD version, you're talking about a new game.

 

[Average Manatee]

One of the first things you learn in SC is that if you spam click you override their normal shit movement and make them move together as an actual group (or rather, you constantly reset them to moving forward enough that they don't have time to hit each other and deviate).

Since you mentioned lurkers it reminded me that Blizzard should probably make hold position lurkers an obviously supported feature rather than needing a workaround. Those vets with SCBW more fresh in their mind can probably name a few more "tricks" that could use a more intuitive way to utilize them.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

And they will but not by using retarded archaic UI.

Stop being a casual compstomping retard and learn to play.

 

[Lagi]

Even putting the resolution in widescreen instead of 4:3 would dramatically change how the game is played, since you can see more.

It would required less screen scrolling = less fighting with UI. You perceive it as con? More visible area is also more pleasurable to watch replays (for the one that enjoys this activity).

1 building per selection also forces you to manage your macro skills efficiently and have you jump between army, observation and production very quickly.

SC2 on the other hand is one army death ball group, sometimes two for spellcasters, and groups of 6-7 production buildings where you can train units super quickly without ever having to look at your base. So exciting.

What is exciting in jumping between army, production and observation?! Dont you want focus more on fights (especially in micro demanding game) and observation?
In every rts I play (in sc1 also), I try to produce units and do upgrades without jumping back to base.

====================more wishlisting
locking groups of units like in in Dawn of War.
I mean; I select unit group, I "lock-group", then after I click one member of "lock-group" the whole formation would be selected.
It will no bet good to do with mixed unit types, but selecting group of zerglings would required less mouse marking and would free number slots (for building in my case)

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

Let me perform a community service and tl;dr every single one of this guy's posts in this thread for you all:

Let's remaster Fallout 1/2... by making them into Fallout 3!

 

[ArchAngel]

And they will but not by using retarded archaic UI.

Stop being a casual compstomping retard and learn to play.

This still means little. You need a better line.

 

[ArchAngel]

Let me perform a community service and tl;dr every single one of this guy's posts in this thread for you all:

Let's remaster Fallout 1/2... by making them into Fallout 3!

Means nothing in this context. If BwHD was turned into FPS then you could make this comparison. Stop bring retarded.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

Let me perform a community service and tl;dr every single one of this guy's posts in this thread for you all:

Let's remaster Fallout 1/2... by making them into Fallout 3!

Means nothing in this context. If BwHD was turned into FPS then you could make this comparison. Stop bring retarded.

Except it means everything, because you basically want to turn Starcraft into a dumb macro game and/or moba for compstomping retard casuals and totally destroy the essence of why it's good and why you just need to git gud.

 

[ArchAngel]

Let me perform a community service and tl;dr every single one of this guy's posts in this thread for you all:

Let's remaster Fallout 1/2... by making them into Fallout 3!

Means nothing in this context. If BwHD was turned into FPS then you could make this comparison. Stop bring retarded.

Except it means everything, because you basically want to turn Starcraft into a dumb macro game and/or moba for compstomping retard casuals and totally destroy the essence of why it's good and why you just need to git gud.

Nope, still a bad comparison.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

You want to make the game into something dumb and far more easily accessible that appeals to retards, by reskinning a newer franchise entry. It fits perfectly.

 

[ArchAngel]

Keep telling yourself that. The truth is, the changes are not that radical. Yes they will change how BW plays but not even 5% different than how F3 changed how F1 and F2 were played.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

They are completely radical changes that totally alter the way the game is played and would absolutely shatter all of the game balance to the point you're not even making a "HD" version of the game but just reskinning SC2. If I was wrong, SC2 and BW would basically be the same game, which they're not as is evidenced by the fact we're even having this conversation. As far as I'm concerned, the similarities between the two are basically superficial. You really need your dumbfuck tag back.

If BW was so absurdly challenging that nobody can figure it out and all of the QoL faggotry that ruined the franchise with SC2 actually in fact made the game totally superior, it wouldn't be on the rise again in Korea where SC2 is declining. You wouldn't have players like Rain and Soulkey quit very successful SC2 careers to play Brood War, either.

 

[thesheeep]

Seriously, man.
You need to relax.

 

[ArchAngel]

They are completely radical changes that totally alter the way the game is played and would absolutely shatter all of the game balance to the point you're not even making a "HD" version of the game but just reskinning SC2. If I was wrong, SC2 and BW would basically be the same game, which they're not as is evidenced by the fact we're even having this conversation. As far as I'm concerned, the similarities between the two are basically superficial. You really need your dumbfuck tag back.

If BW was so absurdly challenging that nobody can figure it out and all of the QoL faggotry that ruined the franchise with SC2 actually in fact made the game totally superior, it wouldn't be on the rise again in Korea where SC2 is declining. You wouldn't have players like Rain and Soulkey quit very successful SC2 careers to play Brood War, either.

You need to find your comfort blanket or your eyes are going to pop from your skull. It is not end of all if Brood War gameplay gets a bit of changes so it can get new audience, and although you think it would now be some other game, that would really not happen. Macro would be easier with automine and MBS and controlling units would be a bit easier with unlimited selection. The base gameplay would remain unchanged, just a bit more friendly for new players to Starcraft or those that only played Sc2.

 

[ArchAngel]

Also RhodokMasterRaceOfficial is your name Jealous on TL forums? You sound just as radical about every little change being end of the world as he is.

 

[RhodokMasterRaceOfficial]

Except all of the things you want to change are not just "a bit of changes" but in fact enough of a change that it would totally alter the way the game is played and make it have very little resemblance to the original, to the point where it is not a "HD version" but basically a different game entirely. The base gameplay would absolutely not remain unchanged and if you think it does then I seriously think you need your dumbfuck tag back.
The most I would accept is to smooth out the unit pathing, support bigger monitors, allow hotkey rebinds and add natural support for certain glitches that're frequently used in leagues like mutalisk stacking and hold position lurkers. That's the fullest extent of what you can do to the game without losing everything that makes the game unique from its substantially inferior sequel.

 

[AMG]

In SC/BW, rather than each unit in a selection seeking a point offset from the the cursor based on its current formation as is done in SC2 (which allows them to "flock"), all the units try to walk to the same spot and then give up if they can't reach it (causing them to funnel into a straight line).

That's not true actually, units in BW try retain their positions in formation after the movement is complete. The awfulness of pathing is a result of them trying to fit on a grid of squares, which is cut up by terrain, obstacles and other units, while the sprites themselves have various shapes, they rotate and morph during movement animations, which compounds the problem immensely.
Here is a great article on BW pathing if anybody is interested:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/429573-broodwar-and-starcraft-2-pathing