SC2 - Snipers

[ZER(o)]

Yeah. I have made suggestions to change it so it had more of a feel to SC1 if it were supposed to be a direct port..

But IMO, the game we were used to playing was dying not just because of hackers, but the fact MORE INTERESTING GAMES ARE OUT

If we stuck to classic style, only veterans like us will play the map, if we made it new with different features and a different look, more players would be attracted to it.. that is the point. Most players are losing interest in a game with such a simple concept and now that all the skills we developed for SC1 are almost worthless in SC2, its not worth trying to make it be the same.[COLOR=Silver]

I'm not so sure I agree with this. The fact is, although there are more complicated games around now, and more games with different appeals, you can never de-value a game with a classic idea and easy-to-pick-up mechanics. Capture the flag is timeless, both in the virtual and real world. The military uses it for war games, gym class in schools use it for exercise, many multiplayer games use it for variety. It's just a very lasting concept. The problem is we can't translate it exactly, and a port of the game just would not work.

The game has died dued to the lack of people playing SC, the hackers, and the ridiculous learning curve Locks Only added. Now SC2 is the final nail in the coffin. I'm interested in trying both maps, but again, if there isn't a way to kill someone outside of blinding, I don't think the game will work unless a outside source with a fresh set of eyes - or someone open minded - can rework the game to keep it's fundamental standards along with adding something new from the power of the SC2 game editor.

the whole "if you don't like it, keep to SC1 Snipers" train of thought is flawed and you know it. How much longer is that idea honestly going to be able to hold up? A year? Less? We have like 50 or less active snipers as it is. As soon as we're whittled to one or two clans, we're finished. Either we support everyone trying to make a map, which includes both MavericK and Epin3phr1n3 obviously, or just give up on sniping entirely. To be honest, I've never found a more fun game than snipers, and I know many people agree with me.

[SaVoR]

I'm not so sure I agree with this. The fact is, although there are more complicated games around now, and more games with different appeals, you can never de-value a game with a classic idea and easy-to-pick-up mechanics. Capture the flag is timeless, both in the virtual and real world. The military uses it for war games, gym class in schools use it for exercise, many multiplayer games use it for variety. It's just a very lasting concept. The problem is we can't translate it exactly, and a port of the game just would not work.

The game has died dued to the lack of people playing SC, the hackers, and the ridiculous learning curve Locks Only added. Now SC2 is the final nail in the coffin. I'm interested in trying both maps, but again, if there isn't a way to kill someone outside of blinding, I don't think the game will work unless a outside source with a fresh set of eyes - or someone open minded - can rework the game to keep it's fundamental standards along with adding something new from the power of the SC2 game editor.

the whole "if you don't like it, keep to SC1 Snipers" train of thought is flawed and you know it. How much longer is that idea honestly going to be able to hold up? A year? Less? We have like 50 or less active snipers as it is. As soon as we're whittled to one or two clans, we're finished. Either we support everyone trying to make a map, which includes both MavericK and Epin3phr1n3 obviously, or just give up on sniping entirely. To be honest, I've never found a more fun game than snipers, and I know many people agree with me.

That is your viewpoint because it is a biased viewpoint. You have played snipers just as long as me, but your world is still stuck on snipers. A simple game that requires little strategy in order to play. Sure, its easy to pick up on.. but when a new player decides to try it out and notices how easy it is to play and without a base of strategy, its easy to lose interest.

In a veterans case, they are used to the game and know the game based from SC1.. but this isn't SC1 now is it? The game is different which requires a different type of "Snipers", not the one we are accustomed to. To get a larger player base, give it more strategic value while keeping the basics easy to learn.. otherwise the game is the same every single time. (This includes STILL keeping the same layout, which is a mistake) Also.. make the game more complex, giving multiple ways to achieve your goals instead of just running up and down the map.

[ZER(o)]

That is your viewpoint because it is a biased viewpoint. You have played snipers just as long as me, but your world is still stuck on snipers. A simple game that requires little strategy in order to play. Sure, its easy to pick up on.. but when a new player decides to try it out and notices how easy it is to play and without a base of strategy, its easy to lose interest.

In a veterans case, they are used to the game and know the game based from SC1.. but this isn't SC1 now is it? The game is different which requires a different type of "Snipers", not the one we are accustomed to. To get a larger player base, give it more strategic value while keeping the basics easy to learn.. otherwise the game is the same every single time. (This includes STILL keeping the same layout, which is a mistake) Also.. make the game more complex, giving multiple ways to achieve your goals instead of just running up and down the map.

My viewpoint is absolutely unbiased. I'm even saying I have more faith in whatever ideas you're willing to bring to the table rather than someone trying to create a direct port. I said the game is easy to pick up, I didn't say anywhere that it was easy to master. I've never heard anyone say anything along the lines of "you know, this game is just too easy to be good at. I'm probably already the best. I think I want something a little harder." It doesn't have any kind of complicated rules you need to learn in order to be able to just play the game, but you'll soon find out that it's still one of the toughest, most challenging games to master. This has been doubly true since 2004, where the harsh Locks learning curve has been discouraging new players for making it too hard to catch up to the more experienced players. It requires a lot of work to be able to do all of the various techniques proficiently, on top of that. No one learns all the glitches, how to judge an angle, or how to stance and d-lock without monumental amounts of practice. I'm also not "stuck on snipers." I have not even played a game in almost a month, and I don't really have a desire to.

All I'm saying is maybe my standpoint isn't exactly neutral, having been a big fan of this game, but it's far from biased. Snipers is pretty much a masterpiece of fast-paced, skillful, competitive action with very few rules to memorize. Maybe games like Temple Siege really do require more skill than snipers to play, but a game vs. other pros in Snipers is extremely challenging, and the sets of procedures in games like RP and Temple Siege are almost condescendingly frustrating, while aiming to achieve the same outcome as snipers: Something that is fun where skills pay off.

[Oragami]

Snipers should just play west server imo
No Frost and Hacked game lists..

[FalseLights]

Sniping in SC2 is far more different than SC1 and it will always be like that.

I still think that sc2 snipers can be petty damn close to the skill level and game play as sc1 through extensive triggering and data editing.

Back in August, I suggested the use of making the sniper fire a projectile instead of his default method of fire in order to solve the no hs and no fire issue. As well as a pulse method similar to that on sc1.

For those who haven't read the post.
SC2 Snipers • View topic - Crazy Idea to Test..

It's a rough notion but I'm confident that something to this degree can be done through the sc2 editor. It's a matter of how far we're willing to go.

[SaVoR]

My viewpoint is absolutely unbiased. I'm even saying I have more faith in whatever ideas you're willing to bring to the table rather than someone trying to create a direct port. I said the game is easy to pick up, I didn't say anywhere that it was easy to master. I've never heard anyone say anything along the lines of "you know, this game is just too easy to be good at. I'm probably already the best. I think I want something a little harder." It doesn't have any kind of complicated rules you need to learn in order to be able to just play the game, but you'll soon find out that it's still one of the toughest, most challenging games to master. This has been doubly true since 2004, where the harsh Locks learning curve has been discouraging new players for making it too hard to catch up to the more experienced players. It requires a lot of work to be able to do all of the various techniques proficiently, on top of that. No one learns all the glitches, how to judge an angle, or how to stance and d-lock without monumental amounts of practice. I'm also not "stuck on snipers." I have not even played a game in almost a month, and I don't really have a desire to.

All I'm saying is maybe my standpoint isn't exactly neutral, having been a big fan of this game, but it's far from biased. Snipers is pretty much a masterpiece of fast-paced, skillful, competitive action with very few rules to memorize. Maybe games like Temple Siege really do require more skill than snipers to play, but a game vs. other pros in Snipers is extremely challenging, and the sets of procedures in games like RP and Temple Siege are almost condescendingly frustrating, while aiming to achieve the same outcome as snipers: Something that is fun where skills pay off.

I have set a few ideas to the table and everyone has shot it down because it isn't like SC1 snipers, it ends up being a different type of capture the flag and they didn't like it. There is only so much you can do with this game to keep it the same as SC1.. Its just too bad that NOBODY likes changes. This proves my point by trying to create a direct port off of SC1 for SC2..

Yeah you may not still play this game, I don't either. But my point was is that you are still stuck on the fundamentals of what SC1 was like: (HS, SHS, Blinds, Glitches, Angles, Pulse, Etc.) Maybe try to create a game that has skills that arent solely based on the mechanics of the engine, but moreso the mechanics of the user and what is given to them at the start of the game (aka skills/abilities)

---------- Post added at 02:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:22 PM ----------

I still think that sc2 snipers can be petty damn close to the skill level and game play as sc1 through extensive triggering and data editing.

Back in August, I suggested the use of making the sniper fire a projectile instead of his default method of fire in order to solve the no hs and no fire issue. As well as a pulse method similar to that on sc1.

For those who haven't read the post.
SC2 Snipers • View topic - Crazy Idea to Test..

It's a rough notion but I'm confident that something to this degree can be done through the sc2 editor. It's a matter of how far we're willing to go.

Making it a projectile is a good idea but in order to attack someone in blinds your sniper first needs to see the unit before the vision goes away. Its not like our ghosts are skipping units that run into fog, they just dont fire. That is, if you want it to operate like SC1.

If you want it to operate in your own way, HS can be extremely simple to do, I have already triggered that while testing new features in previous versions of the map. But then again.. it comes to the point of whether or not all these people who want it to be exactly like SC1 will like it. Probably not.