Unit sizes, proportion and movement...

I really hope I am not duplicating an existing topic...

How many of you guys think the proportion between infantry, vehicles, ships and building must be rethought about? It was okay for SC, but hey? Some years have passed since then... I mean, a Command Center is meant to be a HQ, a center of a base, and if you look close, no more than a dozen marines can fit inside one.... Same thing for Battlecruisers and Carriers.. they are supposed to be CAPITAL SHIPS, and capital ships are supposed to be HUGE.

Another thing: Ship and Vehicle movement. Why cant ships do strafe runs and banking and all? IMHO I think it is ridiculous for starships to stare at each other and shoot each other in the face until one dies. I mean, Command and Conquer Generals made it really cool about aircraft movement, not to mention HomeWorld 2, so why can't Blizzard?

This is mu first post, I hope I have some replies and opinions ;-)

 

Welcome to the forums, marcusrodrigues.

Blizzard optimizes the unit sizes for gameplay - balancing seeing as much as possible on the map with being able to micro and identify each unit. So I am fine with the size discrepancies.

We do actually have a topic on ship movement though, so get in the habit of doing a search!

 

Because the game is about micro, and has "nothing" to do with realife

 

Well, I still think "reallife" sizes or close to reallife sizes and movement would do no harm... I find C&C Generals completelly playable and micromanageable, and is does have real proportions between units, vehicles and buildings... Otherwise, it could end being really SC in 3D, and not THE King of RTS games we are expecting it to be....

 

i would say that to date Blizzard's game have moreso been about conceptualism than realism. besides, in terms of game mechanics and playability, i don't see having correct proportions as being a realistic goal. if battle cruisers were to be as big as the view area then marines would be reduced to maybe a pixel in size (making the game rather impossible to play).

as to more advanced animations and fighting, where would we draw the line? almost any unit could 'realistically' attack or cast a spell on the move. though i do agree (as you say) that two battle cruisers staring each other down is rather bland.

consider the maneuverability of a vehicle/ship and the agility + range of motion for a unit. a battle cruiser or carrier is not very maneuverable - they rely on armor and heavy fire power, not dodging bullets. a mutalisk, wraith, or interceptor on the other hand would be quite maneuverable. these things are already somewhat reflected in the game mechanics through speed, turn speed, acceleration, etc. besides, it's rather hard to evade bullets, lasers, plasma, and green goo.

it would be neat to see some additional animations performed when a unit does evade or block an attack, but not many units have that capability. other than that, i think Blizzard considers attacking while on the move to be a special ability (what's that new terran vehicle...), so battle cruisers will still just stare each other down (although i think there's some additional 'damage' effects, like pieces falling off).

 

also remember that this is starcraft 2 not command and conquer. blizzard makes its games a certain way that gives them a niche in the RTS market. if every realtime strategy game applied the same things then they would all be the same. Although your ideas are not bad ones they drastically change the basic combat system of starcraft, turning starcraft 2 into a different game entirely.