You say that but how it seems to me you are the one that has no clue what he’s talking about or you’re living in some bubble.
first of all, for me there is literally no “whats next” i was strictly talking about unit selection limit. so please withhold your urge to tagging along other useless chatter to what my original post stated.
Unit selection limit is in every possible way a tech limitation of its time and the company worrying people have bad computers.
Infact while the food limitation and upkeep also “seemed” like an obvious game mechanic it was also part of the plan to “keep the gameplay to lower numbers of units running around the map for possible performance issues”
And even THEN we have clear evidence the game was still mildly rushed to get finished in the end.
you can keep denying that fact in your perfect bubble.
i don’t care, and get myself out of the threads before i’m consumed, again. (again again).
oh and i love how you entirely ignored my PERFECTLY reasonable suggestion of removing or allowing map makers to remove in CUSTOM games.
What is it with people and calling other preferences as stupid? Yes there’s plenty of people who love warcraft 3, love the hero system, the creeps on the map, the 4 races and their unique gameplay, but hate a fken stupid limitation that was done because of tech limitations at the time, not for the micro crap you pro-wanna bees keep screaming about thinking that makes you in any way interesting of even quasi intelligent. And yes there are people that prefer the 12 unit limitation for their own reasons other than trying to be pro-wanna bees. Instead of jumping on each other’s throats and do nothing but rant, the solution is simple - a frekin game option - for both custom and melee - 12 unit limitation option. That’s it. If some people wanna play it with the limitation - play the fken limitation. If some people don’t wanna play with the limitation - give them the fken option to do so and just don’t play with them. Jesus f… everyone is liberal this days, but the only wet dream they seem to have is push their bulls.hit on everyone else’s throat. Make multiplayer games require all players have 12 unit limitation checked or unchecked and be done with it. It’s a stupid option that allows both old style play and new style play.
"12 unit limitation was strictly there because of the times tech limitations and worry that people have too weak computers.
that’s a fact."
Prove it
Make a rational argument as to how this would improve the game
So far the only argument I see behind this is “clicking less buttons” makes the game easier to play. Yes, it would make the game easier to play, but it would also completely change how the game is played.
You know what would also make the game easier to play? Removing creep camps. Why not just add level up tomes in the shops at 1000g a piece, and skip all that annoying “creeping” and get straight to the fighting?
How about we make it even easier and just remove unit collision. All that annoying body blocking and awkward pathing. Just have everything run through each other…
Where do these “improvements” end before you end up with a game that’s been so watered down it’s no longer fun to play?
Why stop there? Remove respawn timers on reviving heroes. Make all heroes that die instantly respawn at the graveyard. Make everything EASY right?
Here’s another one… Why bother with lumber? So annoying. Just give everyone shredders at the start of the game. HELL… just remove lumber from the game and make the only resource gold… Easier is better right?
Imagine what a pos game this would be if Blizzard listened to every dope that wanted their game to be just a little bit easier for them to play. No thanks.
You do realize that literally was a tech limitations - when wc3 was launched it was still the early days of 3d rts - there for hit boxes and models were basic as F. You had that same problem in most early rts games because AI pathfinding was in it’s most basic form. The fact that players turned a tech limitation into some sort of gameplay feature is pretty much religion stuff - turning something stupid into something holy.
Bunnyhopping started out as a bug in Quake, and yet it became a staple of the series and the competitive scene. Why? It made the game better in ways the developers didn’t intend… the players loved it so they kept it in.
Nobody cares what the original intent was, the question, as always, is did it improve the game or make it worse. Body blocking adds a whole new dynamic to game play that makes players think and process the situation.
Players today don’t like things like “thinking”, “decisions”, and “consequences”, they want 1 button win mechanics and they screech like farm animals when they don’t get it.
Yeah, it made it so much better that pretty much every rts game since then had pathfinding in mind and tried all sorts of algorithms to make unit movement more fluid and less retarded. Starcraft 2 is such an easy and totally not competitive game, and the 2 things they had in mind about gameplay improvement was making unit pathfinding good so they stop walking like idiots on the map and stop blocking eachother and also remove the 16 unit selection limit. It didn’t seem to ruin starcraft Esports scene in any way, and apparently all the old pro-players still managed to deal with not having those 2 amazing gameplay features they must’ve been so attached to. Idiotic pathfinding like unit blocking doesn’t just effect your battle. You get idiotic behavior even from non combat units - if someone game me a quarter everytime my workers blocked eachother’s paths while gathering lumber i’d be a fken rich man right now.
Thats why pretty much all the old game remakes of today - age of empires 1 and 2, the soon to come CnC games have as one of the first improvements - improved pathfinding so that units don’t block eachother’s paths no more. Did this create interesting game moments - sure. But pretty much any tech limitation can create interesting game moments - having 10 population maximum will create unique game moments, having 1 gold mine per game can create unique and action packed game moments, but does it improve the overall gaming experience of MOST players - no it doesn’t. That being said - i go back to my first suggestion - what is it with you people and being against the idea of option - you wanna keep your old limitations have them via options - Age of Empires 2 definitive edition added all 3 AI options - the original one, the enhanced one and the definitive edition one. So that each player can fken chose what he wants to play. Would it really ruin your game experience in your pro-wanna be bubble to have an option to have the 12 unit selection or not have it in both melee and custom? Having to check one fken option ruins the game? Really ?
Sorry you won’t sell me on that “well everyone else is doing it” garbage.
Fortnite is apparently what shooters are doing these days, and I refuse to play that rainbow colored profit driven “build stairs in mid air” bastardization of what shooters used to be. That’s not a shooter, it’s hot garbage.
Body blocking in RTS is a skill… it adds to the game. You take that away and that entire dynamic of the game is GONE. The whole point is that you, the player, are in control of how that works, and it’s a test of skill to see which players can make that work better than others.
Limitations and restrictions in games, are a BIG PART of what makes games fun. People who have never been involved with any kind of game development will never understand that because you’re looking at it from the perspective of someone who just wants 1 less obstacle in their way to win more games.
You can keep talking all day about what other games are doing, and how popular they are. Fortnite is popular, and it’s also hot garbage most people who played shooters will never touch, because it’s hot garbage.
Warcraft 3 is a unique game, leave it the hell alone and stop trying to argue it should be “like everything else”. That’s not a rational argument.
Limitations and restrictions that force players to stop, think, process their next decision, develops into something called skill, because some people are able to do that a little faster than others. Stop trying to make the game easier, for no reason other than to make the game easier…
I agree that FRIENDLY units blocking each other could use improvements but not enemy to friendly. This is important feature of the micro management of the game, as important as Upkeep and other dumb ideas to remove them.
You keep bringing fortnite as if everyone plays that. There’s a tone of people who never even saw a game video of that game myself included. As for game development experience - dude i’ve been a CnC modder for almost 12 years - talking about gameplay diversity and features was one of the most talked stuff in our team. But there was always a discussion that was like this - this would be a mechanic that needs player skill but this would also be a mechanic that makes most players not use - and we always had to come up with staff that added both complexity but also felt play friendly. That being said - i for one don’t really mind unit blocking when it comes to battles because i do agree it adds interesting mechanics. But that also means that unit blocking is everywhere including between YOUR units. It means that when you order your army to move, and in their retarded pathfinding way find a narrow spot, they block eachother every fken time and you end up having to drag them one by one to move them beyond that point. It also means your workers will block eachother’s paths everytime one of them decides to go 1 tree deep into the forest and the other workers that gather from nearby trees will block that 1 worker until they themselves go back with the wood and so on. In a game, you’ll have at least as many wtf moments with your units blocking eachother and acting all retarded as you’ll have - that was awesome - battle moments where player skill makes the difference - and that’s where my earlier point about adding complexity comes into place - how much coolness does it add vs how much frustration to the player it adds.
However the point of this tread is not unit blocking - but selection group limitations. And if unit blocking is not something you can fix so easily with a simple frekin option, group limitation is. And having an option that either enables or disables 12 unit groups would really make this game fun both for old players stuck in their old ways, and for new players who don’t enjoy this particular limitation but who enjoy EVERY other feature of this game. Just because someone doesn’t enjoy literally a tech relic from the past, doesn’t mean they wanna turn this game into some easy crap game. And as a rule of life - when pretty much everyone wants to fix something in their products, it means that something is not that good.
“And if unit blocking is not something you can fix so easily with a simple frekin option, group limitation is.”
^ This is the problem, you’re arguing a false premise. You’re starting with the assumption that people agree with you that limiting groups to 12 units is a “problem” that needs to be “fixed”.
Full stop. I don’t agree with you this is a “problem” or a “mistake” in the game.
This is where you say but “this game” and “that game” doesn’t have that restriction, and we should look at “modern” games to guide us. People don’t care about those other games, if they did, they would be playing those games and not this one…
“And as a rule of life - when pretty much everyone wants to fix something in their products, it means that something is not that good.”
Pretty much everyone? Who is everyone? The “community” as I see it, are the people who kept this game alive all these years through multiplayer, and I don’t see them asking for this change, quite the opposite…
Why do you think people stuck around to play a “broken” game for almost 20 years? It’s not complicated… it’s because the game is fun exactly the way it is, and those people, as far as I can tell, don’t want anything changed. The graphics obviously being the exception, given they don’t get in the way of game play.
Because it has one of the best editors ever made for a game, and most people who stayed did it for custom games. If you think most people stayed for the multiplayer - you are delusional. It was the mapping community and places like hiveworkshop that kept it alive, not your amazing puritanist 18 years old tech limitations turned into holy books. As for how many people think the 12 unit limitation is bad - well if you followed this forums there have been a F.ton of posts about it, where most people agreed and there were a couple of puritans who didn’t. And apparently you didn’t read my post much - because i said that since this is a sensitive thing, the best way to fix it is by making it an option - and yes giving us the ability to chose between having that limitation or not having it, would not really be a massive amount of work. Who’s pretty much everyone - every fken game developer that created RTS games. Since age of empires 2, or starcraft 1 every time technology went up a little, every game tried to do pathfinding better. Been following the gaming industry for the past 20 years - yeah - i’m not that young - and one of the biggest issues in RTS development has been unit pathfinding. Every game ever made lost community faster than anything else due to sh.itty pathfinding, because to your surprise most people find it frustrating as F when they order their units to move to one location and they see them bumping into each other like brainless ta.rds trying to reach that point through different narrow locations or some other terrain thing that turned the AI into a brainless frog. And if the gameplay was not solid enough, it died due to it. So that’s everyone - all game developers ever had as one of the big issues to solve when making their rts - how to make units NOT block each other and actually move in the most efficient and non-fukt up way possible to where the player ordered them. As for gameplay should stay 100% the same way - play TFT then. No one is taking that away from you - if you can’t deal with having options to improve gameplay experience then stay with your 18 years old game and play that. If shi.tty tech limitations don’t bother you, then shi.tty visuals due to tech limitations shouldn’t either. But don’t expect everyone else to agree with your puritanic stuff just cause you can’t deal with having something as evil as options.
You’re pushing false premises to bolster your argument and it’s nonsensical. You keep saying “everyone” as if you speak for anyone other than yourself, and you use words like “fix it” as if we agree there is even a problem to begin with…
I said this before and I’ll say it again… Reforged is not for people like you, because people like you admittedly do not like the original game. You say it over and over… People are going to try to hijack what Reforged is, and try to turn it into an opportunity to make “Warcraft 4” with all their fantastical ideas of what the game “could be”.
If you start meddling under the hood of what makes this game what it is, it’s no longer going to be Warcraft 3, and your argument for changing the game inadvertently exposes how much you actually dislike the game.
Why Blizzard would optimize the game for people who don’t even like the original, as it is, is a mystery to me.
You don’t want Reforged, You want Warcraft 4, and that’s not the purpose of this release. This is a REMASTER… google Warcraft Reforged, it says it right there on the front page, REMASTER.
Stop trying to make this something it was never intended to be.
The liquidy smooth unit collision and pathing is one of the most cited complaints I’ve heard leveled at SC2. There’s a reason BW is more popular than SC2 in Korea. Sure, it’s competitively viable, but the main reason it’s disliked (and I agree) is because it makes combat less fun. Fights are over way faster as a result and dealing killing blows is infinitely easier. Ramps are serious defensive fortifications in brood war.
Melee units get a large portion of their value from taking up physical space and actually blocking like a frontline. If the pathing experience is “improved” like in SC2, where units push eachother and there’s no turn rate, kiting is infinitely more powerful (see SC2 marines compared to SC1) and melee units are far weaker (this is why SC2 ultralisks suck).
Regarding the limit selection, I see people begging for this daily, but imo it just shows how little experience they actually have playing WC3. Make use of 2-3 control groups and it’s infinitely easier to control your units than it would be having everything in one bloated group of mixed unit types. One control group is like wanting to click all of your abilities in a moba instead of using the qwer keys. Use the number keys.
The final thing that bothers me about these incessant requests, is that many of those requesting them seem to be under the delusion that if these conveniences were added, WC3 would somehow be able to surge in popularity as an RTS. SC2 has all the bells and whistles you guys are begging for, and even still, as everyone knows, it’s “ded gaem.” Go play SC2 instead if you prefer those features. RTS does not have the mass appeal you all think it does, and it never did. Even at WC3’s peak, most online users were playing customs and Dota. The state of SC2 compared to mobas demonstrates this.
I already wrote it on other post but even if the idea could be good this suggestion is coming from too late.
During a beta we are only in a debug phase.
For adding or testing concept of gameplay you have to be on a pre alpha or alpha version of the game.
So sadly your idea has at least one year late.
You do realize there are other RTS games than WC3 right? You do realize the command and conquer series has a way way bigger community even to this day than warcraft would ever dream of having? The only RTS games that have a limited control group were old as F games, and even then only a couple of them. And none of them were MOBA’s. I get your dislike for the MOBA genre believe me - i consider it an unfortunate mistake for the RTS genre because since it was created with DOTA it ruined multiple games, including one of my most expected one - Dawn of War 3. So enough with the fortnite/MOBA crap - no one wants to turn this into a moba or a fken shooter or w/e fortnite is considered. To say that people like me don’t like an entire fken game because i don’t like the control group limitation is stupid at best. The 12 units limitation does not define warcraft 3 at all. They could’ve just added a 16 unit limitation as it was in starcraft and then you and the other 3 purists would defend 16. Or they could have a 30 units limitation as it was in Age pf Mythology and then you would defend 30. The only reason you keep on defending this one is because Blizzard more or less randomly decided to go with 12 instead of another number. But even then - all most people want is to have a fken option to chose - to either use the limitation or not use it. And to pretend that somehow anyone who doesn’t wanna use this limitation doesn’t love this game because you and the other purists left think in your little tiny bubble that the only way to love a game is if you love every fken little detail about it is about as arrogant as the inquisition was with religion. I played and enjoyed almost all non-moba infected RTS games in the past 20 years, and there were always thing i did not enjoy in everyone of them. There is no such thing as a perfect game, even in WC3’s case. If reforged only offers improved model visuals - cause atm the terrain and doodads suck big time visually, then it might as well be called WC3 skin pack - social justice edition. And for someone who played warcraft 3 since Reign of Chaos was released - that’s not much of a motivation to come back to or to further invest in it. And like me there’s alot more people than there are like you. I come from multiple communities of RTS players - the age of empires one, the cnc one. If you wan’t to attract players you need to at least give them option to customize the gameplay. I don’t think they should scrap the 12 unit limitation - i think they should add options to use it of not. When starcraft 2 was released i enjoyed it, and i play it when ever i feel like it. And because they didn’t just copy pasted BW with new visuals, and actually added alot of new gameplay improvements, i bought pretty much every skin pack they released, every co-op commander and so on. Why? Because the game was NEW and fun, because it wasn’t a copy of a game i already played for years back in the BW days. But with WC3 reforged - i played it for years. If the new one just adds HD visuals - i don’t feel like investing anything in it as there’s nothing new. Yes having the option to turn off the group limitation would attract additional players - players that come from different RTS communities such as the C&C one. One of the biggest complains in the cnc community over WC3 other than ofc the fantasy setting was the control limit. If blizzard want’s to keep the same 50 people that still play WC3 only - then they can release this HD texture pack. If they wanna add new blood to it, then they need to add options to customize gameplay experience. And the simple fact that you couple of purists refuse to even have the OPTION to turn this crap on or off, pretty much shows how little you care about anyone else’s preferences and how happy you are to push your cr.ap on everyone else, because somehow somewhere the universe named you few people the guardians of truth and how everything has to be played. Having this option would still enable you to play the game as you want, but it would also enable others, many more people, to enjoy the game as they see fit. Because believe it or not, and i know this comes as a shock - you’re not the holder of universal truth in gameplay or anything else.
IDK what that has to do with anything. At all. WC3 and C&C share a genre only, they’re super different fundamentally.
You don’t seem to be reading what I said very well. It was just an analogy. I like mobas, they’re fun to play with friends.
Starcraft 1 is limited to 12 as well, not 16 fyi. And (shocker) it’s integral to how the game is balanced and played there. The reason it’s defended is it’s tried and true as a core part of the gameplay; changing it would alter the game irrevocably. That’s the key part: it effects balance. If the game had a higher limit, it would have been balanced around it all these years. It wasn’t, because it didn’t. You keep bringing religion up so you can feel like a superior enlightened being, but you’re the one who wants to bring in changes purely on belief alone, rather than any demonstrable track record.
I agree there, customs should be free to remove it. It only needs to be there for core WC3.
Ah, Riptor is right. You want Warcraft 4. This is not a new game, it’s Warcraft 3. The problem really is that simple it seems. I want Warcraft 4 too, but not as a poorly thought out copy-paste job over top of Warcraft 3.
Projecting much? All I’m saying is the game shouldn’t be significantly altered when only random speculation is offered as the reason. As I’ve said numerous times, WC3 is designed with such small population limits that you only need a few control groups of units at absolute most (peanuts compared to Brood War). The game is actually far more obtuse and difficult to play with all units in one group. Learn control groups and the suggested change doesn’t have any reason to exist.
And here’s some speculation of my own, but I think C&C favoring players have a whole boatload of reasons to not like WC3, and the unit limit is not a significant one (upon just starting to play they think it is, but they probably haven’t gotten into it enough yet). They’re pretty much on opposite ends of the RTS spectrum in design. Being able to move your army around in one jumbled group isn’t going to change that whatsoever.
As I’ve said before, it’s not any better for new players either. The fact is someone has to lose the game, often painfully, and if you’re a noob moving your army around in one group, it’s probably gonna be you nearly every time. This pain is the reason 1v1 competitive games are so niche in nature. No one wants to buckle down and learn (the same reason 12-unit limit is being complained about). Again, I’m only talking about WC3. For custom games I’m all in favor of removing the restriction; the more freedom there the better.
Well, OP, judging by the responses in this thread, I think we know the general intelligence of people who want the 12 unit selection limit.
Anyway, stop with the slippery slope. The problem with your argument is that you’re claiming that the 12 unit selection limit somehow adds depth to the game and taking it away would remove said depth. That’s completely false. All it does it make the game harder for new players.
12 unit selection is completely different from boxing units, pathing, upkeep, hero levels, etc. which actually DO add depth to the game.
