Thunderdome 2015 » Printable Version of Topic » Starcraft/Diablo and Supreme Commander

Forum: Games
Topic: Starcraft/Diablo and Supreme Commander
started by: Troy

Posted by Troy on Aug. 24 2009,09:03

First off all, reading the news on Blizzcon, making me pretty excited about playing the newest iterations of Diablo and Starcraft. Obviously, I would take Diablo 3 right now over any other game in the next 3 years, but that's because I've always been a huge Diablo fanboy. Classes revealed so far are "Wizard, Witch Doctor, Barbarian, < and the newly revealed Monk >"

Starcraft 2 should be fun though, All the news has all the geeks pissed off because there is no LAN Support(quasi DRM). I understand that some fans are pissed off, but what is the big deal? Where in the world would you meet up to do a LAN party that didn't have a blazing fast connection in the first place? A quick search actually found < a few articles > that agree with me.

Also. If anyone wants to play some Supreme Commander, I'm totally up for some games.

Posted by WSGrundy on Aug. 24 2009,09:48

My only issue with Starcraft 2 is the splitting it up into three games. Not sure if I like the Terrans and Protoss enough to want to play them for 20-25 missions.

I will get the Zerg game at some point since they were my fav and Starcraft is my favorite RTS.

Posted by Troy on Aug. 24 2009,09:55

(WSGrundy @ Aug. 24 2009,09:48)

QUOTE

Yeah that has certainly bugged me about the current plans for SC2.

They made news this weekend by announcing that the game would ship with this pretty crazy map/game editor, which would basically allow anyone to make pretty much anything. They were gonna do it like the iPhone app store, letting developers charge for premium content.

Posted by TPRJones on Aug. 24 2009,10:16

Anything?! Can we use it to recreate episodes of < Riptide >?

Posted by Leisher on Aug. 24 2009,10:53

QUOTE

Obviously, I would take Diablo 3 right now over any other game in the next 3 years, but that's because I've always been a huge Diablo fanboy.

I really like Diablo, but it's waaaaayyyyy too repetitive for me to put it on the top of my list. That's reserved for FPSs that tell stories like Half-Life, Bioshock, and possibly Portal 2.

QUOTE

Starcraft 2 should be fun though, All the news has all the geeks pissed off because there is no LAN Support(quasi DRM). I understand that some fans are pissed off, but what is the big deal? Where in the world would you meet up to do a LAN party that didn't have a blazing fast connection in the first place?

South Korea. And let's be honest, South Korea put Starcraft on the map. Starcraft was a great game, but it wasn't as good as the hype behind it.

QUOTE

My only issue with Starcraft 2 is the splitting it up into three games. Not sure if I like the Terrans and Protoss enough to want to play them for 20-25 missions.

Ditto. It's purely a financial move, which I have no problem with because if they can make more profit, then they should. however, I don't like them claiming it isn't financially driven. Their lying is insulting.

QUOTE

Yeah that has certainly bugged me about the current plans for SC2.

Please refer to StarCraft 2 as "StarCraft 2". Supreme Commander 2 should be "SC2" (more to type and it'll get more action on this forum).

Posted by Troy on Aug. 24 2009,11:30

Cybrans for life.

Posted by GORDON on Aug. 24 2009,13:11

I would play cybransd but I don't like the electronics jammed up my ass.

UEF for straight men.

Posted by Troy on Aug. 24 2009,13:21

Cybran destroyers make any maps with water against even the tougher A.I. opponents pretty easy.

Destroyers will generally keep your base and harbors clear, and when you get enough of them, drop 4 and a pile of hover tanks right onto the nearest hostile beachhead and roll on up.

Not sure why the computer seems to have trouble with them. The terran missile cruisers will give you grief though, coupled with a few shield ships.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 05 2009,12:21

I've been practicing lately. Use to play it on my old PC, but was limited to smaller games. Have done larger now. But have only been land based. I didn't like water maps with TA, and haven't gotten into them with SupCom. Anyway, I'll be ready to play in the next week or so. Anyone still playing? I have not loaded Forged Alliance yet, but I have it. If there's any game takers, let me know if you have it and I'll load it and learn it real quick.

How many Supreme AI's are you fighting and what size map?

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 05 2009,12:24

I will only play if you have FA.

I was playing every map down the list with full AI, and replaying ones that were funner with harder AI, AI tag teams, etc.

I never did play all the maps, but a lot of them.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 05 2009,12:44

I'll play, and with FA, too.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 05 2009,14:23

Well, then FA will be installed. I wasn't sure if everyone had it already.

And when you say full AI. Do you mean all slots were full? Were they allied? Where they Supreme or lower?

I found an old thread where you were playing two at medium allied. You were going to break their alliance and try again. I'm just trying to figure out where I stand before hand.

Do you guys normally build experimental units? What are your favorite maps?

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 05 2009,14:25

And what night this week? Thursday won't be good for me. Wednesday might be a bit early for me to learn FA, but I'm game. Friday would be fine as well. But I bet the unmarried Troy will have other plans.

I'm in Steam a lot too. So, if you want a spontanious game, message me.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 05 2009,14:29

This weekend is the first time in a long while the GF is going home to visit the parents. I'm not planning on doing anything, as I feel I have been flying around the South East for the past few months.

Basically anything Thursday-Sunday (football permitting).

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 05 2009,14:42

(Cakedaddy @ Oct. 05 2009,17:23)

QUOTE

And when you say full AI. Do you mean all slots were full? Were they allied? Where they Supreme or lower?

I found an old thread where you were playing two at medium allied. You were going to break their alliance and try again. I'm just trying to figure out where I stand before hand.

Do you guys normally build experimental units? What are your favorite maps?

Don't remember fave map names, but YES to all the rest of your questions.

I would play all kinds of combinations. Free for all, medium AI. Teams, with mixed intelligence AI (medium and hard, easy is too dumb). 4v4. 1v1.

And experimentals, in my experience, are the game changers. If yours aren't up when theirs are... or unless you have extreme defenses.... they will kill you. In my experience, the x-bombers are the worst because as soon as they are completed, they are raping you. Not much warning. No slow dot in radar moving toward your base, giving you time to rally a defense. I believe those are from the FA pack.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 05 2009,14:57

(Troy @ Oct. 05 2009,14:29)

QUOTE

Syke, no going home, party on Friday, climbing on the weekend.

um... Thursday?

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 05 2009,16:19

Thursday is the only night I have a life. Looks like you might miss the fight. Unless Gordon wants to fight you on Thursday.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 05 2009,16:41

Depends on how late I'm in Detroit.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 05 2009,18:17

I bet everyone will be pretty tired Saturday night. I'm used to climbing all day though, so depending on what time we get in, that my be a good choice,

Pencil me as a probable for Saturday.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 06 2009,00:04

The AI in FA is MUCH smarter than the AI in plain SupCom. I have played it about 5 times, and have not beaten it. First couple games don't count though as the UI was drastically changed in FA and I had to get used to it. I was playing multiple Supreme AI enemies allied together in SupCom and winning. In fact, the more I played against on a single map, the easier they were. They couldn't get enough resources to really pull ahead of me.

Hardest AI in FA plays different each time. I can't, or at least haven't yet, learned it. I found a weakness in the last game I played, but, I bet it's not there next game.

Much like TA, I'm already thinking up strategies/tactics outside of the game to play better.

One thing I learned, which I found stupid, if you suicide your commander into the middle of their base, he doesn't do any damage when he blows up. Granted, that eliminates the "Atlas Commander" tactic. But still. I don't like it. I always built defenses against that attack. Wasn't hard. . .

Walls don't seem NEARLY as strong as they were in TA. I built some one game, and they got chewed up by artillary pretty quickly.

In SupCom, I remember enemy units firing THROUGH my shields. Would piss me off. I haven't seen that with FA. Bug fix, or I just haven't seen those "shield invulnerable" shots yet. The maps changed a bit too. One map I was playing in SupCom now has energy fields all over it for that one energy building that needs energy fields.

Lastly, I saw the AI building an experimental factory. I let it go. It built a mobile factory with it. I didn't see the value in that. However, I thought it was cool that it assigned a mobile shield generator to it.

Can you guys consistantly beat the hardest (not the cheating) AI?

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 06 2009,05:59

I usually win, unless it is a map I am completely unfamiliar with.

Walls - I never bother. It's like they aren't' there when the enemy rolls through.

Shields - I always see some units rush the shield, get inside it, and start firing on the shield generator.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 06 2009,06:00

Oh, and I used to watch "replays" of games online so I could get new ideas on how to do things, but that was over a year ago so I prolly forgot everything.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 06 2009,06:04

Yeah, I haven't played this game in a while.

I'll probably get stomped.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 06 2009,08:10

I was wrong about the mobile factory. First, it shoots. It might have been what kept taking my shields down. I kept looking for missle launchers. Second, it has a built in shield generator.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 06 2009,08:12

I love the mobile factory, but it is slow and those shields are weak and there was some patch that made it require like twice as much resources to build as what I was used to. I had to change my play style after that.

Plus it refuels airplanes which is nice.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 06 2009,08:13

(Cakedaddy @ Oct. 06 2009,08:10)

QUOTE

I was wrong about the mobile factory. First, it shoots. It might have been what kept taking my shields down. I kept looking for missle launchers. Second, it has a built in shield generator.

You are describing the rolling battleship that is the "Fatboy"

Battleship/Level 3 Land Factory/Shield Generator.

Pretty rad. Unless your opponent has a few Strat Bombers...

Also, < There is a Supcom Wiki > I spend a week just reading and getting to know units, back when I actually played this game.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Oct. 06 2009,08:28

Yes, fatboy.

I noticed a LOT of resource changes with FA. The first one that stung me was with mass extractors. They cost a lot more mass in FA than they did in SupCom. So I had to change my build order.

Posted by Troy on Feb. 18 2010,12:43

Bumping to randomly say that Stacraft 2 is finally at the public beta stages.

Early buzz is very good (and it better be, it's been delayed forever)

I didnt get a Key on the first opt-in, but maybe future ones!

Posted by Troy on Feb. 22 2010,12:25

I downloaded the Beta client so I could still watch replays (also see what it runs like on my system)

I cannot wait to play this game, it looks fantastic, very fast past.

Posted by WSGrundy on Feb. 22 2010,19:39

You can buy a beta key from scalpers for around $300 if you want.

Posted by Troy on Feb. 24 2010,06:06

(WSGrundy @ Feb. 22 2010,19:39)

QUOTE

You can buy a beta key from scalpers for around $300 if you want.

I've actually tried to figure out how much I would pay for a legit beta key.

Figure the beta would go on 6 months, and I would at least play 2-3 months of that.

Going by my past gaming budget, that'd be 100 bucks to spend.

But then I kick myself for considering paying money for a game that hasn't been released, and even then, not even buying an actual full copy of it.

Posted by GORDON on Feb. 24 2010,13:09

Eh. Unless you are hoping to dominate in multi play on day 1, what's the point?

Posted by Leisher on Feb. 25 2010,08:15

Yeah, I don't even remotely understand paying $300 for a beta. If you're a professional gamer, maybe it could be justified, but for a typical gamer, it doesn't speak well of their life in general.

That money is far better spent on other games or bills or dates or anything except a game that you'll need to spend another $50 on in a few months to get the real version.

QUOTE

Early buzz is very good (and it better be, it's been delayed forever)

Honestly, the early buzz IS going to be good because only fanboys are playing it. Or does anyone actually think casual gamers are not only following SC2's development, but also possibly paying money to play a beta?

I'm a hardcore gamer, and I'm not even following SC2's development.

To be honest, I don't get the hype. SC was a good game, for certain, but TA and Homeworld (released one year prior and after, respectively) were FAR superior RTS games than SC, yet get far less attention. I blame South Korea's odd obsession with it.

I hate to say this, but SC2 has reached the Apple level of "cult hype".

Posted by Troy on Feb. 25 2010,08:29

The three you mentioned, I've played, and are all fun. Add in CoH and maybe DoW's and you've got all my favorite RTS'.

Unfortunately, DoW and CoH are getting a bit old, Homeworld is lost to IP problems, and TA has evidently been dumbed down so badly that Chris Taylor admits he didn't like the changes. (also didn't even had a beta, to my knowledge)

Starcraft 2 is going to what I play the most this year, most likely. The sheer amount of players, matchmaking on battlenet.2.0, and polish on all of Blizzards games, means that Multiplayer is going to be a ball, say what you want, but what else do we have going for multiplayer RTS's this year?

Posted by GORDON on Feb. 25 2010,08:57

Plus no LAN play, isn't that what I remember?

Posted by Troy on Feb. 25 2010,09:08

(GORDON @ Feb. 25 2010,08:57)

QUOTE

Plus no LAN play, isn't that what I remember?

Starcraft 2?

Yep, that was an issue when they announced it a while back.

I don't know exactly how I feel about it. I have (and a lot of people in my generation) never even played a game on LAN. I suppose if it was a fond memory for you, It would probably matter.

Posted by GORDON on Feb. 25 2010,09:09

Sex is a fond memory too, that doesn't mean I want my penis removed because I don't need it.

Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 25 2010,09:30

(Troy @ Feb. 25 2010,11:08)

QUOTE

I have (and a lot of people in my generation) never even played a game on LAN. I suppose if it was a fond memory for you, It would probably matter.

It's mostly a lot like playing any other online multiplayer, except for one key difference. Have you ever really wanted to reach through the internet and cock-punch that douche that just won't stop running his god-damned mouth?

At a LAN game you can do exactly that.

The end result of that is that there were fewer complete assholes in LAN meets. Thus the fond memories most old timers have for LAN over internet matchmaking.

Of course there were still assholes at LAN games, and sometimes it seemed like they were a plague. But we had no idea what a plague of assholes actually looked like at the time. Because XBOX Live had not yet been invented.

Posted by GORDON on Feb. 25 2010,09:43

Plus forcing people to use your online service while in the same room means you still need to deal with the bullshit of of online ads, ping times to a remote server, and their software sucking balls when you are trying to create and see rooms. Remember the shitty software we had to use while doing SupCom multi? We had to figure out how to use a direct IP connect to even play.

Posted by Troy on Feb. 25 2010,09:48

GPGnet is a hilarious piece of shit, to be sure. I heard they were doing the new one entirely through Steam.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Feb. 25 2010,10:58

I like LAN for the stability it offers. When my son and I multi against each other, it's ALWAYS a LAN game so we don't have to deal with Internet lag.

Posted by Troy on Jul. 16 2010,20:15

Finally got my email for the Beta today. I suppose the game is getting released in about 10 days... better late than never, I guess.

Posted by Troy on Jul. 26 2010,14:44

Available online through blizzard tomorrow at 10 AM.

People who already have preordered copies can access the authorization server at 12AM tonight.

Whooopieeeeee!!!

Posted by Troy on Jul. 27 2010,20:32

Day 1 thoughts:

So far, singleplayer is fantastic. There are a bunch of units that weren't in multiplayer beta that you get to use in singleplayer(probably too many to balance perfectly). Your between mission screen reminds me of Wing Commander/Tie Fighter.

I think I read there are around 30 missions, and the ones I've done so far have been really varied. The most fun so far:

Lava planet where your only resources will submerge under lava pits every 4 minutes, meaning you have to be extremely maneuverable with your resource gathering. When you throw on the "Hard" level the AI hits you with enemies every time you should be microing your guys out of the lava areas, and you end up toasty a few times, great mission.

A virus mission, where you have to destroy a plague infecting a colony, during the day it's managable and you can make headway against the infection, at night the infection spread rapdily, and you have to hole up in your base and fend off assaults until morning.

A train mission, where you have to simultaneously monitor 3 enemy railroad tracks as you salvage rail cars for resources, while dealing with the enemy fortifying the tracks and stepping up patrols.

It's really, really, well done, exactly what I would expect from Blizzard. It's neat seeing all these new units I wasn't expecting, too.

Posted by Troy on Jul. 29 2010,06:05

Did online on Day 2.

Played quite well on my 5 placement matches, and got into a pretty high league (gold).

Then I proceeded to get the floor wiped by better players three times in a row because I don't know shit about build orders and strategy. I plan on reading up and trying again tonight.

Posted by Troy on Jul. 30 2010,09:35

4-1 in matches yesterday. Barely above 50% in my league, but trending upward.

I think I've settled on Terran, race wise. I like Protoss too, but I'm not extremely good with them.

Posted by WSGrundy on Jul. 30 2010,10:41

What are your pc specs? Or if you have vista or 7 what is you experience index? What settings are do you have the game set at and how well does it run?

Posted by Leisher on Jul. 30 2010,11:22

I'm surprised at how little interest I have in playing this game.

I enjoyed the first one too. This one just carries no interest for me.

Posted by GORDON on Jul. 30 2010,11:26

Was reading how a lot of peeps who bought the game on day 1 couldn't play it due to Blizzard's servers being overwhelmed by the DRM verifications.

Posted by Malcolm on Jul. 30 2010,11:32

(Leisher @ Jul. 30 2010,13:22)

QUOTE

I'm surprised at how little interest I have in playing this game.

I enjoyed the first one too. This one just carries no interest for me.

Coworker was at Best Buy at midnight for the release. Took off Tuesday. I bet he played from 1am to 8pm straight.

Posted by Troy on Jul. 30 2010,11:44

Even if you aren't big on Multiplayer, the Storyline missions are simply fantastic, and there are a fair amount of extra "Challenge" missions and Quick matching against the AI.

Not sure about the DRM thing. I was playing the game at 6 P.M. on release day, having downloaded the entire game online directly from Blizzard. I then called in sick the day after that and blew through 1/3 of the Single player storyline.

The game is just so much more polished than anything I've played recently. Every 7-8 missions you also get a 3+ minute intense CGI video, which are pretty slick. In between each mission, you get after action reports in in-game video, which is often amazing, as well(High res and on "ultra" settings)

I spent a lot of the first few playtime hours wondering if I really liked the game, or if I was just being a fanboy. Eventually I just decided that it was super fun and that it wasn't worth thinking about. It's the real deal, and it's better than anything I've played in a LONG time.

I expect Multiplayer will keep me interested for quite some time.

Other mission highlights I've done recently:

Map where the planet is being burned in a Supernova, and a giant flame wall is engulfing the map from the side you are closest too. You have to migrate into each enemy base as you take it, staying one step ahead of the flames but still building your army as your go.

Escorting a giant killer robot as he goes on a killing spree against your enemies. He launches nukes and bombards with his huge turrets and you try to keep your smaller units buzzing around him, protecting and killing things that slip through his defenses.

Posted by Troy on Aug. 01 2010,20:43

Had a good weekend. Lots more wins than losses. Climbing up the Gold Ladder. I'm worried that I'll hit my ceiling if I get promoted to Platinum, but we'll see...

Posted by Troy on Aug. 05 2010,22:20

Improving... Finally promoted to the Platinum leagues. Let a few cheesy rushes I didn't know about get me, which made me wait to get promoted a while.

Posted by Troy on Aug. 16 2010,08:13

Ranked #1 in my Platinum division. Another win or two and I'll probably be moved up to the top tier "Diamond". I'm sure I will then get my ass kicked, but it has been a fun ride.

Posted by WSGrundy on Mar. 04 2011,10:35

Only about 7 or 8 missions into the campaign but so far SC 2 is awesome. I have not done any multiplayer games yet but I am sure when I do I will get crushed.

So far every level has had its own theme beyond just killing the bad guy on the map. Night and Day or lava flows stuff like that. Not a ton of difference between them but still adds something different.

The gameplay is the same as before and really have not noticed any major difference between 1 and 2 in that respect so if you didn't like the first then you probably aren't going to like the second. For me I don't let gameplay get in the way of enjoying a game so staying the same as the first doesn't really bother me.

I do like the research tree and earning cash for upgrades between missions. I don't know how I am going to feel about playing the humans for a full game but if it stays as fun as it has been so I can see this being my favorite RTS ever. That is until the next one comes out and I can control the Zerg.

Posted by Leisher on Mar. 04 2011,10:44

When it hits $10, maybe $15, on Steam I'll pick it up.

Posted by WSGrundy on Mar. 04 2011,11:02

(Leisher @ Mar. 04 2011,10:44)

QUOTE

When it hits $10, maybe $15, on Steam I'll pick it up.

Is that your way of saying you will never get it?

Posted by Leisher on Mar. 04 2011,11:24

No. Make no mistake, it WILL hit that price point on Steam. In the stores it won't for years, but Steam is different. They can knock a huge chunk of the cost off because they're cutting out the brick and mortar stores and all packaging. It just won't happen until sales die down, which also WILL happen.

I expect deals will start occurring a few months before the next one releases to get folks like me who didn't buy the original excited about the next one.

I still have little interest in it, but I do like the genre and based on the positive reviews, I'll give it a shot.

In comparison, I bought C&C 4 this weekend for $5 after passing on it when it came out due to how unimpressed I was with the previous game. And that's a universe I really liked.

Posted by WSGrundy on Mar. 04 2011,12:14

Except it will never be on steam. Blizzard uses battle.net to sell its games and content online and sees steam as a middle man. That is why I asked I thought you were making a joke about how you would never buy the game. I don't think you will see on steam and I don't know when it will hit the $15 price point because the original with the expansion included is just starting to hit the $15 price point and that is 14 years later. Diablo 2 bundle is still $30 and that is 10 years old. Blizzard just doesn't drop the price of their games.

This is the first game I purchased at its $50 price tag in 10 years. But seeing their track record I figured it is not the end of the world to get a game that I really at its release price. Plus I need something to hold me over until the Mass Effect 2 game of the year edition comes out with all DLC and with a $25 price tag.

Posted by Leisher on Mar. 04 2011,12:56

My official statement about Starcraft 2: It'll make it to Steam eventually or I won't be buying it until it's $15 in the stores.

I liked Starcraft, but not enough to pay full price for "part 1" of their sequel.

And just to stir the pot, I respect the hell out of Blizzard, but I think they're the most overrated company out there. If you want me to explain I'll start a new thread so as not to derail this one.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Mar. 04 2011,13:51

I started playing SupCom2, and I like it so far. They changed the game play quite a bit from the first one. You still have energy and metal, but now you have research points you spend to unlock higher end units and buff the existing units. So, there are no level 2 or 3 unit types or factories. However, you can spend research points to make more advanced units available, or the current ones more powerful. You gain access to experimental units and they build WAY faster. Experimental units become part of your army, instead of an uncommon devastating weapon. I have only played a few games, and maybe there is still the super unit. But so far, I pump out fatboys pretty quickly and they are part of my rushing force. I haven't built some of the more advanced experimentals yet.

I like the way this version of the game plays. It's very different from the first though. I like the old way as well. So, not saying it's better now, just different and good in it's own way.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Mar. 13 2011,22:53

Finally got StarCraft 2 loaded. Only played two missions in the campaign, then switched over to skirmishes. Played against a medium, and got owned. Played against an easy, but played WAY better, and dominated. Played a 3rd against medium again, and owned him.

That's the extent of playing that I've done. I played just a bit (hour or two) more Supreme Commander 2, and I like SupCom2 better.

I like the zoom functions in SupCom WAY better than Starcraft. You can't zoom out very far with Starcraft which limits your battlefield viewing. The build queues are similar, except SupCom lets you click a repeat button that spits out units constantly. Starcraft limits you to five units and you have to revisit the factory to build more. Unit selection is about the same so far. Have not played all the units in either game yet. Unit upgrades are very similar. In SupCom, you earn research points (have to build a building to generate them) that are spent on unit upgrades and unlocking units. Starcraft lets you upgrade units by spending normal resources.

So, SupCom's battlefield view and build queues make it better than Starcraft so far, in my opinion. Game play and unit selection are very similar so far. Chris Taylor rocks.

Final note, if you like Starcraft, you should like SupCom2 as well. At at the sale prices, it should be highly considered.