Insanetitan

1) Thumbs down on any kind of auto targeting. I just can't see how it would be usefull. 99.9% of the time, the computer is going to choose the wrong target anyway. 2) The whole "all exp goes to the unit that gets the killing blow" needs to go away. It's archaic and unrealistic to say the least. Example: My rook that's been beating on that tower for 2 minutes hasn't learned a thing, but my minotaur that walked up and took the killing blow suddenly had a tactical epiphany?? Seriousl

[quote]Unclean beast or generals.[/quote] This

Because others are stingy about giving credit where it credit is due. :P

[quote]You're basically making the point that I have tried to put across. Which is that PC games can be very successful when they are specific to the platform (e.g. WOW or The Sims). When they try to mimic console games they can not match the bigger audience that consoles have.[/quote] Just to be clear on this, PCs aren't mimicing anybody. Outside of platformers and JRPGs, most of the best games out in recent history were originally slated for, or had a prequel on the PC, even Halo was

[quote]You Role-Play a gangster on the rise in this Game.[/quote] That makes every game that you don't play as yourself an RPG. Obviously, this is not the case. RPG refers to a specific type of game of which GTA doesn't not belong.

@Zellogs I'd like to think that you'll be able to see your opponents level before you join one of these games. Assuming low level players can still host games and that there's still the option of kicking players from games -- both of which are a given in any game -- this isn't going to be much of a problem. Some level 50 player joins your level 5 game? Kick 'em! No matter how someone may love to grief newbies, there'll be no point of they get kicked from every game. <br/

I actually like "assassin". But just to join the thead, how bout "Knight"? It has the connotation of being an elite fighter without being someone who is sneaky or underhanded, nor does a knight command troops (as far as the popular representation is concerned).

[quote]adding all the broodwar units worked pretty well though[/quote] Given that broodwar was an expansion to an existing game, you can bet that most of the production time was spent balancing those new units. So it's not like they threw them in and did the balance overnight.

[quote]Which of course begs the question: what on Earth did the Unclean Beast's mom look like?Personally, I'm going to guess it doesn't matter -- his appearance is just a matter of "personality", not his mothers genome.[/quote] But she still had to give birth to him.....OUCH!!

[quote]Ok, I´m able to run every program through Impulse. But why I should do this? An easily doubleclick on the shortcut is enough...[/quote] Some people don't like having their desktops cluttered with shortcuts or having to dig through the start menu for things you use multiple times a day.

[quote]I hate hard-caps, imo its just an excuse of lazy balance guys to prevent the game to become a spamfest, why not balance the game so that building only 1 or 2 types will result in a loss vs a balanced army? Starcraft has a 200 pop cap btw and as units consume different amount of control, it isn't just because of the technical aspect (unlike it is in Warcraft 1 & 2 or Supreme Commander). I am fine which such a general cap as long as they dont implement silly things like upkeep in

I prefer the no-cap, though it is probably the hardest to implement. I don't really understand the way you defined the different types of pop-caps, though I can guess based on RTS games I've played. You may want to give some examples. Regardless, all other forms of population cap are arbitrary extensions of the no-cap type. Hard-cap and soft cap both just say "This unit here is very expensive and very hard to build (IE just THAT cool), but we still want you to build it in an unrealis

I think it's only slightly justified to include a monitor in the price of the computer. It's pretty much just second nature that makes me say "yes, the cost of the monitor should be included". But OTOH, it's entirely possible to run a computer from a HDTV with little or no extra cost (if you do your research). In addition, for what it's worth, I'm one of the few who actually includes a TV in his console gaming total (yes, my TV is solely for the use of my PS2 (and someday, PS3)).

Can I get paragraphs please? That's not an insult, I'm serious.

[quote]Apologies for the double post, but ability at micro isn't an indicator for strategic skill. By reducing the APM, it could be argued that there is more time for strategic planning, so the game is in effect no longer "dumbed down". Since Sins doesn't have the necessity for high APM (though you can doubtless play it as such), does that mean it's been dumbed down? Nope. Not for me, at any rate.[/quote] [quote]"Dumbed down" was used in a more generic sense, in the way that a demanding

[quote]I agree. Except TA multiplayer *SUCKED*.Get back with me on what the most popular RTS of all time is after you understand that. (Something Sins could learn from).[/quote] Well minus battle.net, TA multiplayer was no more or less sucky than any other multiplayer matchmaking at the time.

[quote]Sorry to say so but how would you like if i say we do not need any americans? who have their ancestors from europe(mostly)...[/quote] [quote]I'd sure hope you made it as clearly a joke as that guy did![/quote] He's probably deformed: born without a funny bone.

You're obviously not familiar with internet meme's.