Ns = Wc3?

Koll · March 2003

Is it me or does it seem like NS is going to like WC 3. The idle people (good) and New Onos abilities allow him to stomp the ground to stun nearby enemies, then devour enemies whole (they are slowly digested, during which time they can be saved by killing the creature). I think the undead have a unit like this. Well just my $.05

HoMIciDaL_PuPPy · March 2003

koll yer wrong its an orc unit the kodo beast.
anyway who cares its a game its for fun i enjoy it and the ideas.

and like he said use the search plzmmkthx

CHAMois · March 2003

I'm not sure if you noticed dude but the warcraft series are RTS games whereas NS is a fps mod.

Wheeee · March 2003

unf. I love wc3, and I love ns. does that mean they're the same thing? no...

coil · March 2003

Flay has said many times that he both loves and has been inspired by WC3. He'd be flattered to hear the two favorably compared.

Coolrunner_ZER0 · March 2003

holy **** dude lets think of this from a dif angle like mine

when i see a really great game like NS, what i see is some great ideas stolen/barrowed from other forms of games, movies, books and etc. so what im getting at is this its alright to mix parts of things that are great to make things even greater.

oh ya lets not forget how many times Simpons has used other ideas to make there show great

<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif'> --------------------------> <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/skulk.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='skulk.gif'> one dead asss skulk

Butt_monkey_salad · March 2003

IMO, RTS arent categoristically correct unless u take out the S. Because since its real-time ALL the time, u cant really strategize cuz it would be more effective to spend that time mindlessly building things and units really fast and rushing. Thats y I preferred Vandal-Hearts(old-skool PS1 game), the Combat Mission series, and Squad Leader(the BOARD game, that is)

the exception is this game, of course. Because u cant mindlessly build a million structures or Units since each player IS a unit <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

Silver_Fox · March 2003

you've found him out ... hes slowley turning this into a WC3 mod for HL ...

coming up in NS 2 - the Night Elf class!

teh_Lurv · March 2003

Here is the big difference between WC3 and NS:

WC3: If you give your units a waypoint, they will all get to that waypoint as well as the AI pathfinding can manage.

NS: If you give your units a waypoint, they will all start saying "OMG n00b comm!" and then proceed to run into the enemy base single file to be slaughtered by static defense.

<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

BlaqWolf · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Silver Fox @ Mar 31 2003, 01:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> you've found him out ... hes slowley turning this into a WC3 mod for HL ...

coming up in NS 2 - the Night Elf class!  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
OMG I WANNA EVOLVE INTO A HUNTRESS!!!!

IskatuMesk · March 2003

NS is so differant from wc3 you shouldn't even be comparing it. Flayra is merely using some of the gameplay-improving aspects and taken a few ideas, but NS will never EVER resemble wc3. Period.

SoBe_Dragon · March 2003

the onos's new ability is the combindation of 2 orc units

1) Kodo beast - eating units and digesting them slowly
2) Tauren Chieftan hero - AE stun

RyoOhki · March 2003

Well, I'll say this. War 3 and NS unfortunatly suffer from a very similar problem. To eleborate...

In War 3 basically the first battle between you and your opponant decides the game. I've seen plenty of people just say "gg" after the first battle if it didn't go their way. Why? Because it's almost impossible to come back: too much of your resources have been wasted. NS though often suffers from the same problem: if that first base the marines set up is quickly over-run and destroyed (say a processing base with phase, tf, few turrets) then the game is usually already over: the marines never recover. Similarly, if the first alien hive expansion is rushed the game is, again, basically over; the aliens never again have the resources to recover from the instant loss of 80+ resources.
I don't really know what the solution is. Maybe the changed resource model will help. But this really is something I see most games, and I'm sure others would agree. In this respect War 3 and NS really do, unfortunatly, have a lot in common.

Dogg · March 2003

In response to Ryo-Ohki...

I agree. In both games the sides are different, but even with the variety of units, there is always one or two tactics that "counter everything"... usually by simply being fast enough to kill you before you have access to your stuff that counters it.

In case you mentioned, hive rushing.... A great idea was suggested in the S&I forum. Skulks could spend 8 res to create their own little "respawn chamber" that would respawn them in the spot they placed it in. To counter a hive rush, create a respawn chamber near the enemy base. You can harass/kill their base while they are phasing and trying to take your hive. The only way to save their base is to stop attacking your hive and defend themselves. If they DO kill your hive, you can still respawn at your personal chamber (if you made one and it didn't get destroyed) so the aliens that had foresight (hopefully all) are still in the game. To make sure marines dont lose to "repawn chamber abuse", make the chambers have low hit points and you must currently have a hive to build one (though it will still respawn you without a hive).

Anyhow the idea is give EARLY and USEFUL options to the teams... Basically marines have all the early toys. Phase, mines, turrets, lvl1 upgrades, ability to lower respawn time (by buiding more IPs), and siege. I think that's what gives them an edge. It gives them more options.

I'm looking forward to 1.1 which will basically give the aliens more options and hopefully make their upgrades more useful (A counter to motion tracking or a very slow move while cloaked would be useful).

KI6 · March 2003

I actually think Counter-Strike is becoming more like W3 rather than Natural Selection due to that stupid server-side plugin of weirdness. Seems more like an excuse to cheat legally.

Immacolata · March 2003

Only rarely do we see really ground breaking game designs appear. Innovation is risky when you want to make a buck on it too! Most people claiming to "innovate" really just improve on existing stuff, or combine things. Take a good, long hard look at Natural Selection. Then compare it with the many games you see already published. Natural Selection is like a jig saw puzzle of concepts and ideas, pieced together by many different existing ideas about gaming, and with a few ingenious jig saw pieces that the developers came up with them selves. Resulting in a game that has a lot of "This reminds me of..." but yet it has it's very own, distinct style. And it's very special gameplay flavour that I have never experienced. I was never a Tribes man or TFC man, so for me Natural Selection was a wet dream come true - sort of.

The whole basic idea behind Natural Selection is so fundamentally BRILLIANT that I say to myself "Dang, why didn't _I_ think of this?". They tried to emulate the Command & Conquer univers in Renegade, but failed to grasp it's potential. The Natural Selection way is a superb way of bringing to "FPS" some of the 1990s most popular game genre: The RTS married with FPS. Rather try and sit down and envision the various Natural Selection spin-offs based on established franchises.

Warcraft III would actually be well suited for this conversion, since it has relatively few units per army. Imagine you being a peon <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'> A lot of ideas used in Natural Selection is already seen before in other games. Most games are today, game making is all about evloution - improving on existing knowledge has many benefits. It allows game developers to use tried and true tools, guaranteeing at least a bare bones gameplay worth anyones time. IT also allows the players to relate to a new game by association. "Ah, you see, Natural Selection is, like, take Aliens versus Predators - you know, marines versus icky aliens. Climbing on walls, mad 3d-action, many gnashing teeth and big guns of whoop-****. And then put on top Starcraft, you know? One guy controls the other guys by minmap. With waypoints and all that. And they make structures on the maps, but shoot at aliens with guns and reload ammo. And they can research upgrades and buy better guns."

wlibaers · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Butt monkey salad @ Mar 30 2003, 07:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> IMO, RTS arent categoristically correct unless u take out the S. Because since its real-time ALL the time, u cant really strategize cuz it would be more effective to spend that time mindlessly building things and units really fast and rushing. Thats y I preferred Vandal-Hearts(old-skool PS1 game), the Combat Mission series, and Squad Leader(the BOARD game, that is)

the exception is this game, of course. Because u cant mindlessly build a million structures or Units since each player IS a unit <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
If you want some other good suggestions, Total Annihilation on the big sea maps is prety strategic (plenty of time for strategy if even your jets take about 30 seconds to get to the other side, and if your fleet was in the wrong spot you can really forget about ever getting to the right spot in time). Not to mention the amphibious assault: it takes ages but if you can get past the navy it's slaughter time if theydon't have much land based defence. Or you can tech rush: nuke attack! The key is, combined arms, always. It's not absolutely necessary, but it makes you much less efficient if you don't. Best of all, you don't have to babysit individual units, they generally realize how they should fight on their own.

Dark Reign is also good, requires a bit too much micromanagement though. Close combat 2 was excellent, and for a faster sci-fi game (not strategic, strictly tactical) Ground Control.

One of the worst strategy games, IMHO, is Starcraft. Micromanagement is everything, all those magic units have to be individually to be effective. Sure, thet're very poweful, but by the time you've given the first half an order the other half is already dead. And if you only rely on non-magic units, you're at a serious disadvantage. Warcraft 2 was a bit better because it had fewer magic-micromanagement units. WC3, I only played the demo and that made me realiz I'd probably hate it as much as Starcraft after a while. Even worse is it in some role-playing games. Diablo or Dungeon siege? Cool new toy when you start, once you know the tricks (after 15-30 minutes) it's just not fun anymore but tedious work. In Starcraft, its not tedious (way too fast-paced to get bored) but it still feels more like work than fun.

Micromanagement can sometimes be fun, but only when you have a small group of units and you have interesting choices to make. Jagged Alliance 2 (turn-based) for example, is a really good turn-based game. Lots of micromanagement, but you actually can perform some meaningful tactics instead of just getting everyone to cast the same obvious spell as fast as possible in SC.

Ph0enix · March 2003

One of the greatest innovations in NS for me personally has got to be hivesight. It's such a simple dynamic, you can see your own units through walls, not complex really, but it changes the gameplay so much.

So yeah, NS is a total rip-off of WC3. I'd be interested if someone could compare the dates they went into development.

Re: the original post, idle peon/worker is a great idea, why not take it ? Original ideas in RTS usually always become part of the 'standard' interfaces. If this didn't happen you wouldn't have groups or drag boxes now would you ?

Re: devour, look at Flayra's original post on it. He states he was already thinking about it, and WC3 merely cemented the idea.

Stomp I have no idea about, however try following this logical line of thought. Yes, I know using logic is frowned upon but tough <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

JPs are to be the 'hard' counter to Onos<b>></b>Paralyze has to go<b>></b>Still want a 'stun' ability of some sort<b>></b>Must only effect marines on the ground<b>></b>Stomp!!<b>></b>Obviously a 'Stomp' would indicate a mini-earthquake effect so it's AOE<b>></b>

And voila, you just happen to develop an ability which is similar to a tauren chieftan's. Which is the obivious outcome as they are both supposed to be ground control tanks susceptible to air attacks.

<b>You</b> try and come up with an ability for a ground unit which only stuns other ground units and makes sense which isn't some sort of stomp/earthquake effect.

Align · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (-_Phoenix_- @ Mar 31 2003, 04:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <b>You</b> try and come up with an ability for a ground unit which only stuns other ground units and makes sense which isn't some sort of stomp/earthquake effect.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Organic EMP! OMGZ!!!
Renegade would have been 1000 times more popular if it had NS-like commander interface, but if that had been the case, I would have frowned upon NS when I first heard of its features, dismissing it as a rip-off, and never know about the fun I would miss... Or maybe not, since I usually get a mod for HL if it 1) Doesn't look like crap, and 2) Isn't super duper realistic wannabe/in some way is considered to be a cross between X and CS...

Shockeh · March 2003

2 words describe Renegade.

'Missed Opportunity'

As for WC3....

WC3 Single Player - Sweet. Great fun RTS

WC3 Multi on LAN - Fun, but unit massing. Kind of like Championship Manager with G strings.

WC3 on Battle.nut - OMG I HAVE TEH 13373I2 5']['24'][' TH4N J00!!!111 OFFENSIVE TURRENTS!

(Hint, building either a) The same unit 5,000,000 times (Hunts) or B) building towers around their base, is not strategic, or implying a good game. Because if it was good, each unit would be used in the way that the 'background' to the game would suggest. WC3's units aren't, hence it's not.

Not that I'm bitter.... <img src='http://watmm.com/forum/html/emoticons/angry.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image'>

BlindFire · March 2003

Warcraft 3 is a RTS with to little strategy to be fun. As most units are just a more powerfull version of each other. Too much micromanagment so only the more powerfull hero abilitys is any usefull (ok, maybe polymorph too). Rear/Flank attack dosent matter at all. If you pick archers instead of the tougher melee units you are at disadvantage. Units can take too much damage for any kind of using the terrain at your advantage or other tactic should matter enough to change the game play. The only good strategic element is that siege weapons cause extra damage on structures.

NS on the other hand has excellent strategy, heck even the alien side has more tactical options than any side in WC 3!

My favorite strategy game really is an unknown one called Warhammer: Dark Omen. If you are not good at strategy you are toast! RA 2 had also good enough strategy.

As a comment to the DS/Diablo statement. Those two are Roleplaying games without any roleplaying, I love true RPGs.

Pod · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (wlibaers @ Mar 31 2003, 10:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Dark Reign is also good, requires a bit too much micromanagement though. Close combat 2 was excellent, and for a faster sci-fi game (not strategic, strictly tactical) Ground Control.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
close combat 2 and 5 = win <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>
i agree however many RTS games today invovle little or no stratergy. its basically "churn out units" with no real actual idea of what to do besdes "destroy enemy"

also, im sure the "idle peon" thing was first introduced into Age of empires 2 first before WC3...maybe even in a game before that

Shockeh · March 2003

/me w00ts at his signed by dev team Dark Reign poster.

Yay me!

Maian · March 2003

Being a WC3 player, I wonder how many games of WC3 you've played to come up with the opinion that WC3 doesn't have much strategy. Mass hunts may outmatch other tier 1, but they're annihilated at higher tier. It's also not that hard to ward them off with good base structure and micromanaging your hero (and maybe some units) while you're teching.

Personally, I think that WC3 has more strategy than NS once you master micromanagement (micromanagement can only get you so far). Besides that marine vs. alien (2 sides) thing seems rather static.

Have you played the Frozen Throne expansion beta? It seems like a completely different game far more so than Brood Wars compared to Starcraft.

Butt_monkey_salad · March 2003

Do any people in here feel that whenever u play any kind of strat game (turn-based, RTS, whatever) that u feel like its a commitment? Like, I sometimes felt hesitant to play WC3 when I was going through the single-player campaign, I GUESS, because of fear of frustration or aggressive willingness to win(got that alot in SC, and I mean AAALLOOOOTT <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'>) Yet I played even more horribly online and could still jus go and start playing that like nothing...go figure <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'> I think Im just very lazy or something

BlueTorpeedo · March 2003

this topic seems to have gone from:

"Intellectual Property VS Progress" to "NS VS WC" (?)

I hope it doesnt become X forum member VS Y forum member.... hehe

anyhoo, on the intellectual propetry side, if Blizzard doesnt end up caring then it doesnt really matter at all. From the standpoint of NS vs WC, i find it silly to try to compare them, they are too different for that to be productive.
<span style='color:green'>
"I know! , lets write the 100000000000000 billion reasones that 2 TOTALLY DIFFERENT GAMES are ........................... different!?"</span> <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><span style='color:green'>
"...then we can argue over who is right , despite most of our conclusions being formed from OPINIONS!"</span>

You all might as well discuss the similarities... it will save you time.... <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>
I dont mean to be a jerk but posts about stuff (X vs Y) like this is a pet peave for me.... and i am a jerk , but dont use that against me.

Ultimatley, <span style='color:yellow'> YOUR ALL LOSERS! </span> talking about NS on some silly forum when you could be <span style='color:yellow'> PLAYING NS RIGHT NOW! </span>.......... wait a second...... <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'>
<<span style='color:purple'><i> BlueTorpeedo cringes as he realizes hes a llama hypocrite,.... launches HL and shuts up.</i> </span>>

RyoOhki · March 2003

Err, Bluetorpedo, I hate to say it but that post is probably going to be butchered by the forum mods. Our masters don't really like us using colour <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

And anyway, on the War 3 topic, just LOOK at the changes in the Frozen Throne. The beta forum can be found here. check out the changelogs and understand that Frozen Throne is going to change the entire game. <a href='http://www.battle.net/forums/board.aspx?ForumName=war3x-beta' target='_blank'>http://www.battle.net/forums/board.aspx?Fo...Name=war3x-beta</a>

sekdar · March 2003

Ryo-Ohki, what you described is called the "slippery slope" or "sliding scale" effect.

Simply put, gaining the first advantage often means winning the game.

This is in many, many games, and even has its place in real life situations. Sirlin.net describes it pretty well: <a href='http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_slipperyslope.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_sli...ipperyslope.htm</a>

And as for Wc3, yes, the expansion is making it a whole new game in terms of strategy.

Guspaz · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Koll @ Mar 30 2003, 11:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Is it me or does it seem like NS is going to like WC 3. The idle people (good) and New Onos abilities allow him to stomp the ground to stun nearby enemies, then devour enemies whole (they are slowly digested, during which time they can be saved by killing the creature). I think the undead have a unit like this. Well just my $.05  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>personaljesus: I'm not sure if you noticed dude but the warcraft series are RTS games whereas NS is a fps mod.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Number one, many RTS games have this feature. WC3 is not the first to have it, nor will it be the last.

Number two, NS is a mod that introduces RTS gameplay into an FPS environment.

So, is it really so strange that Flayra is adding a common RTS feature to NS?

Amped1 · March 2003

Anyone else who wants to see this topic locked? You can insult him all you want but that isn't gonna help. Yes NS does have ideas that are based on other ideas. That does make it that other move/game/book/etc. Now, please die topic.

Calantus · March 2003

Who gives a flying F?

Seriously, I don't care. How many sane people who played WC3 flamed blizzard for putting in the idle peon button? Age of Kings was the first to introduce this, but nobody cares, it is a very helpful thing and blizzard would have been flamed if they didn't put it in.

Originality is over-rated. Want to discuss the originality of elves? Or dark-skinned elves? Or elves who live in the forest and protect nature? Pfft. Blizzard even said thet NE were an amalgamation of Drow and Wood Elves (Forgotten Realms and Warhammer). Want to talk about orcs, goblins, ogres, golems, gragons, skeletons, ghouls, necromancers, liches, demons or anything else about Warcraft 3?

How about devour? Did you know that the giant in Warhammer can/could (I haven't got the newest version because I'm low on cash and Warhammer just slurps it up) swallow units? And that those units came out if it died? How about stomp? I can't think of anything specific (well, the giant had a move like this, but it just killed, no stun), but do you want to bet that Warcraft 3 was the first to put something like this in? I wouldn't.

Like I said, originality is overrated. Almost everybody borrows. Games or books or anything else that don't borrow are very very rare indeed. Frankly I don't want to limit myself to Dune, Wolfenstein 3D and Pakman just because I want originality and only originality.

Unless this was just a mental exercise, just chill. It doesn't matter.

Ns = Wc3?

Comments