Page 2 of 4
Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:59 am
by GORDON
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: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:00 am
by GORDON
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: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:04 am
by Troy
Yeah, I haven't played this game in a while.
I'll probably get stomped.
Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:10 am
by Cakedaddy
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: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:12 am
by GORDON
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.
Edited By GORDON on 1254841967
Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:13 am
by Troy
Cakedaddy wrote: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.
Edited By Troy on 1254842089
Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:28 am
by Cakedaddy
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: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:43 pm
by Troy
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!
Edited By Troy on 1266525811
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:25 pm
by Troy
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: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:39 pm
by WSGrundy
You can buy a beta key from scalpers for around $300 if you want.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:06 am
by Troy
WSGrundy wrote: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: Wed Feb 24, 2010 4:09 pm
by GORDON
Eh. Unless you are hoping to dominate in multi play on day 1, what's the point?
Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:15 am
by Leisher
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.
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: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:29 am
by Troy
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?
Edited By Troy on 1267115457
Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:57 am
by GORDON
Plus no LAN play, isn't that what I remember?
Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:08 pm
by Troy
GORDON wrote: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: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:09 pm
by GORDON
Sex is a fond memory too, that doesn't mean I want my penis removed because I don't need it.
Edited By GORDON on 1267117778
Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:30 pm
by TPRJones
Troy wrote: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: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:43 pm
by GORDON
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: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:48 pm
by Troy
GPGnet is a hilarious piece of shit, to be sure. I heard they were doing the new one entirely through Steam.