Timewaster's Guide Archive
Games => Video Games => Topic started by: Prometheus on June 13, 2002, 01:36:34 PM
-
Hey everyone! Big news! (for many of us anyway)
Blizzard announced on their website today that Warcraft III is shipping on July 3rd!
And really. Isn't it about time?
Any votes on what their next announced project will be?
-
what's warcraft?
-
Blizzard's next project? I'm kind of hoping for Starcraft 2, but I think we have to wait a little longer for that one. Whatever the next project is, it will likely come from Blizzard North; all they've ever done is Diablo and Diablo 2, and they've anounced rather firmly that they're not working on Diablo 3. So it's hard to predict. I tend to think it will be a new world altogether, but I can't imagine what type of game it will be.
-
there will never be a starcraft 2...
-
omfg u dont know what warcraft is? u havent been into computer games for long have you? man its about time for war3. next blizzard game? hmmmm. im guessing itll be a fps - that way blizzard can fulfill their habit of taking existing genres, doing sod all innovation in them and them selling 30 millions copies, half of em in south Korea - they have televised starcraft tournaments there would you believe?
-
i don't go on computer games a lot i spend more time playing tabletop and going on the internet
-
Sorry, but I have to be truthful Lord_of_Me. I went into a slight convulsion when I saw your post asking what Warcraft was.
To explain a bit better, Warcraft and Warcraft II were made by Blizzard, the company that is better known now for Starcraft. The earlier games were set in a fantasy world with a Humans vs. Orcs premise that has evolved a bit over the years. They were both groundbreaking in their day (isn't every Blizzard game in one way or another?) and were both Real-time Strategy games, essentially early versions of Starcraft. Going back to them now feels really clunky since they didn't have user interfaces figured out as well then, but they were incredible strategy games in their day.
I personally wouldn't guess Blizzard would make a First Person Shooter game. There have been many attempts by non-FPS companies to break into the genre and all of them have pretty much failed. Not to say that Blizzard couldn't do it, but...it seems to me that there is more fertile ground out there. Also, the fans that their previous games have attracted tend to be more of the non-FPS crowd anyway.
As EUOL pointed out, guessing at the nature of an entirely new project is difficult, and Blizzard North is due for a release, assuming that logic holds. A Starcraft game is highly unlikely to come out of Blizzard North, since that's a Blizzard title and they tend to keep their works separate. I also wouldn't expect another MMORPG to compete with World of Warcraft. I guess I have more to say about what I don't think they'll turn out next than what they will. If we're unlucky, it will be an expansion for Warcraft III. They like to come out with an expansion soon after a game releases. Of anything I could guess, that would be the most likely.
I suppose I ought to make a legitimate guess since I started this anyway. Let's go with a sci-fi genre (details don't matter, as Blizzard worlds aren't really very original anyway) ...can't be a RTS since that would just be Starcraft all over again...I already said not a FPS or a MMORPG...I don't think adventure games make enough money for Blizzard's tastes...um....for lack of better options, how about a Role-Playing Game?
-
I think a Blizzard FPS is definitely a possibility. After all, if they'll do someting as out-of-character as a MMORPG then there's really no telling what they will or won't do. It would be great if they did an RPG, though I'd appreciate something closer to Fallout than Diablo.
-
their next game is actually a MMORPG based on Warcraft. but you probaly mean next game to be announced. i realy don't care, Diablo is the only blizzard game I like. anyway I do know that starcraft 2 is useing the warcraft 3 engine so i wouldn't be suprised if it came out late next year.
-
Sigh. More RTS games. Why can't more games be as cool as Serious Sam?
-
lol.... serious sam
-
I would like to see something new. And I would especially like to see something that is not a MMORPG.
-
something new???
what is this strange word (new)
-
No fooling about not wanting another Blizzard MMORPG. I'm looking forward to World of Warcraft, but those MMO games take way too long to review.
Now that I think about Blizzard North more though, it's possible they're still working full-time just to fix Diablo II.
sigh
-
i have hear that Blizzard has been tossing around ideas for Diablo 3, they want to make a true 3d game like dungeon seige.
-
IsInstallingWarcraftIII(x) -> Cool (x)
TRUE -> IsInstallingWarcraftIII(ME)
Sorry, just a bit of humor from my CS background.
-
That was humour? ???
-
Only to CS people, Me. Only to CS people...
-
The humor of it comes sometime after you do your first few hundred problems involving those things I think. Sort of like watching cows. (Which really can be funny if you watch them now and again over a period of years. They do some odd things.)
-
ooooh kaaayyy...
cows. my god. this website is cursed :P
though it has to be said that its really funny when u get out of ur car to have a wee and a bunch of em wander over and watch. its amazing how people suddenly become really self conscious and hurried when a bunch of cows are staring at their genitalia...
-
mooo
cows are actually quite funny if you think about it
this brings about a question that has plagued manlkind since the dawn of time:
why moo?
-
They, um...cows don't actually moo. It sounds nothing like that.
-
Only slightly unrelated news for those who have been anxiously watching World of Warcraft: Blizzard posted recently that they expected to begin the beta in 2003. I have a conflict here. Typically I would expect this date to be moved back to a later time, prolonging the interminable wait. At the same time, however, I have to note that Blizzard has grown more and more reluctant to name dates for ... well anything more than a 2-4 weeks in advance, if that.
The only semi-logical explanation I can think of is that a MMORPG might need a more extended beta test, and Blizzard might also be thinking that since they will have a continuing development team, the balancing might go without quite as much fine tuning. They have also stated before that WoW was announced much later in development than most Blizzard games. The game really does look to be quite far along to me.
So, what do people think. Might we have a new Warcraft game in perhaps two years from now? Or less? Do we really believe Blizzard this time, or will we simply conclude that the beta projection will fall to Blizzard's mushy timetables?
-
I finally got Warcraft 3, and I've been playing through the single payer campaigns. I was part of the on-line beta, and I'm a litle burned out on the multiplayer aspect of the game.
Anyway, I'm almost through the first campaign, the Humans. The story is interesting, but it seems *identical* to that of Neverwinter Nights! Undead swarm a city, and a mysterious plague must be stopped before an ancient evil awakes and returns. I'm a little disappointed in this "parallel" between the games. I've beaten NWN already, and as I'm playing through WC3 I'm thinking, "Haven't I played this already?"
Has anyone else noticed this? Perhaps it's just me, but I think I remember seeing someone else mention it on the official NWN boards.
-
I can't comment on Neverwinter Nights, but on the whole, the plot of an undead army overrunning a town isn't original at all anyway. If it's a problem, it lies in both of them.
One thing I do recommend for the Warcraft III single player campaign, however, is to read the background material in the manual first. There's a lot of stuff in there that would help one figure out what's going on. There is some history behind everything that the game itself doesn't bother explaining.
-
Having almost beat WC3, I have to say that it's just WC2 with a facelift. Sure, the fmv's are MUCH better, as are the graphics in general, but the gameplay is virtually identical to the earlier Warcraft titles. I heard that Blizzard wanted WC3 to concentrate on smaller battles, ones involving only 3-4 units, but having played through the single-player campaigns, I see no evidence of this.
Interestingly enough, my favorite levels in the single-player campaign are those that involve no "building" whatsoever. You start the level with your hero and a few other supporting combat units and have to make your way through the level with the resources that you start with. There have been three or four of these levels, and they're fun because I don't have to stress about building a big enough army or fighting off the enemy as they invade my town. The whole level is at my pace, and I enjoy that.
Can you tell that I'm not a big fan of rts titles? :)
-
Okay, I just beat WC3. Very standard Warcraft plot. Demons invade, various factions fight and then kiss and make up, and then the enigmatic Night Elves kick some demon butt and save the day. Blah.
The cinematics, however, were incredible. I watch the fmv's on these Blizzard games and wonder why other companies even bother releasing the crap they do. Every game Blizzard puts out shoots to the top of the charts and stays there. The rest of the gaming world should take a hint or two.
Well, WC3 left the plot wide open for an expansion, true to Blizzard's usual form. Yes, the demon hordes are destroyed, and the undead Scourge is stopped, but that demon-infested Night Elf hero-dude is still off rampaging somewhere, and fallen-paladin-blackguard-deathknight-dude Arthus is still rampaging somewhere, too. Yay.
Well, I have to admit, while the game ate up some time and had its moments, I'd recommend Neverwinter Nights over it any day. Yes, I know they're completely different genres, but NWN is just a better game.
Okay, I'm stepping down from my pedestal now.
-
Yes, sadly Blizzard did back off somewhat on its previous intention to make battles small squad and made the game much more like Warcraft II then was originally announced. I was thrilled by the early statements of the roleplaying strategy game blizzard said they were going to make. Some of the elements are still there, but...it ended up a very very good RTS instead of the intended RPS (they even used that acronym for a while).
There are a good deal more innovations that Warcraft III made that make it a true giant among the RTS games available, but I'll hit those in our upcoming review. Overall, I'd say that a comparison between Warcraft III and Neverwinter Nights isn't terribly fair to either game, although people have been sorely tempted to do so by their concurrent release and popularity. Warcraft III is a RTS and Neverwinter Nights is a RPG. They're just totally different beasts.
-
Yes, they are different, just as I stated. I know, apples and oranges. I still enjoyed NWN significantly more than WC3.
-
Hehe, that hardly seems fair since you already stated you don't have a taste for RTS games. ;D
If Warcraft III isn't your taste, I'm still curious if playing the game still made you more or less interested in World of Warcraft. At first this seemed a bit off-topic, but upon further thought, I think that World of Warcraft is a very relevant Warcraft III topic. It's quite odd for a game to have its sequel approaching release (in Blizzard terms) when it first comes out. In a way, Warcraft III can be seen as simply prepping the gaming community for Blizzard's MMORPG. (which I expect to make them far more money than Warcraft III will) Then again, you might be averse to MMORPGs as well. There's certainly a number of reasons to be.
Additionally, was the plot in Warcraft III sufficient that you think you might buy the expansion? If not, borrow/beg it from someone else? You didn't seem excited about the storyline of Warcraft III (a sentiment I somewhat agree with) but I'm curious about whether you have continuing interest in what happens next. If experience holds true, the expansion plot may be much more fullfilling. (In the same way that Brood War had a better plot than Starcraft)
-
Have they already announced an expansion? Or are we just assuming they'll do one because they always do one?
-
Buy the expansion? Probably not. The plot was typical, and while WC3 is NOT a bad game, nor even just a mediocre one, it just didn't really catch my attention (yes, despite the fact that I played through the whole game). An expansion seems like it would just end up re-hashing the same thing over and over.
Diablo II was radically different than Diablo. I was working at a Software Etc. when Diablo II came out, and so got an excellent view of how the public recieved it. It was recieved VERY badly, initially (despite incredible sales figures). The fact that you couldn't save and the unfamiliar gameplay caught many people unawares. They wanted Diablo verbatim with a graphic facelift. That's all Warcraft III is: Warcraft II with a facelift. There's no new innovation.
World of Warcraft? I'd be lying if I said that it didn't intrigue me--I'd love to play an ogre mage and cast Bloodlust on myself to make that funny growling noise. I've thought all along that WC3 was nothing but an "event" to prep people for playing WoW. Look at it this way: the world introduced in WC1 and WC2 had two races: very boring for a MMORPG (Everquest has 8 or so races). WC3 got everyone pumped with the Warcraft world and concept (after about a 6 year hiatus). It also introduced two new "races": the Undead and the Night Elves. can you see how Blizzard is using WC3 as a medium to make WoW work?
In addition to all this, I have a bone to pick with MMORPGs. Why should I pay $50 to get a game and then an additional $10 or so every month for the "privilege" of continuing to play the game? I'm not big on online gaming at all. In fact, i was one of the beta testers for Warcraft 3. The beta was online only, and I was sick and tired of lag and pimply 12-year-olds grunt rushing me.
-
Fellfroch: an expansion is assumed with Blizzard titles. The plot also leaves huge threads open for an expansion.
-
Yes, although in official Blizzard statements they haven't decided to do an expansion yet...it's hard to believe them. The plot has huge question marks left at the end, and World of Warcraft's plot is supposed to start four years after Warcraft III if memory serves.
As far as World of Warcraft fees are concerned, it is annoying to be required to pay so much, particularly after the 'client-for-free' experience I had with Shattered Galaxy. I am actually glad in a way, however, that they are going to be charging for continued use of World of Warcraft. The fee isn't going to be for the privilege to play the game. If it was about that, we'd have to pay for current battle.net games as well. The fees are there to support the development team primarily. The game is intended to continually evolve, have Gamemaster-run events, and to generally be better-run than anything currently out there. Also, the fees will go toward preventing those same 12-year olds you mentioned from hacking the game. It's a lot easier to get caught when your credit card number is involved and there are staff out there watching for hacks. Consider Diablo II, a game that despite Blizzard's efforts, has been utterly ruined by hackers and dupers. I'd love to see a Blizzard game that lacks that corrupting element. As far as whether World of Warcraft will be worth the price, I'll have to decide that as I go along.
I'm also wondering what you expected in the way of innovation from Warcraft III. I saw plenty of innovation in the game, though perhaps not in areas you were looking for them. One of the things that helped me realize this is playing other recently released RTS games. If you want to experience 'nothing new' there are some out there for you.
-
Oh, I know what the $10 goes toward. Still, I played a month or two of Everquest and hated the surcharge. Then again, I hated Everquest, too...at Software Etc. we called it Evercrack, because every time a new expansion came out, all the junkies were in dishing out money to get their next hit.
As for innovation, I expected something new in the gameplay. Other than a graphical facelift and the heroes (and their "rpg"-ish qualities), I just didn't see enough to really catch my eye. Oh, well.
And yes, I am *much* more into rpgs than rts titles.
-
I hope that World of Warcraft won't be very comprable to Everquest or even newer games like Dark Ages of Camelot. Blizzard has big claims out to revolutionize the dumbest parts of MMORPG gaming, (like that hideous leveling snore game) and they better come through on those. Should they do so, a moderate fee won't sound so bad I expect.
-
I still probably won't get it. I've never been big on online role-playing. Or online games much at all, for that matter.
-
I'm actually quite pleased with online games, and the price doesn't bug me (provided I can get the initial software for free, which is how a lot of companies are doing it these days). If it weren't for my addiction to Clix games, I'd be shelling out 15 bucks to renew my Shattered Galaxy account when it expires on Thursday.
I agree with Prometheus, though: Blizzard had better make the lower levels of its MMORPG way more interesting than other companies have done.
-
I dunno, Fellfrosch...I really enjoyed killing 6 THOUSAND skeletons to level up to second level in Everquest. What about picking up all of those spider eyelashes and bat guano bits to sell for 1/25 gp? I mean, you can't beat tried-and-true gameplay like that.
-
Spider eyelashes would be cool. I spent my time in Dark Age of Camelot picking up skeleton knuckles and scraps of ragged hide.
-
And sold them for a paltry 1/25th gp, I'll bet. Low levels in MMORPGs are just dumb. I spent most of my time in Ultima Online slaughtering sheep and carding their wool to sell. Yay. *yawn*
-
Actually if I remember right, it was a lot less than 1/25 of a gold piece. DAOC was really tight with money when we played. You didn't loot corpses to get rich...you did it just to keep up with minimal needs. You could get ahead of the game, but only by a little bit without huge amounts of effort.
-
Yuck, see, I don't enjoy that at all. Real jobs are hard enough, with scraping together cash to pay for bills. I don't need to emulate it in my entertainment! That's why I stopped playing the Sims: why should I spend my free time teaching a computer sprite to use the toilet (and not the kitchen floor) when I have to urinate in real life? Yay, fun. "Cool! My dude in the Sims finally used the microwave without starting a fire!"
-
grrr. so here i am, in the process of upgrading my neolithic PC, and i find £25 left over. ho! thinks i. thats enough to get myself a computer game from amazon. so, after much umming and ahhing i go for GTA III, despite the immense temptation of morrowind. then i see promethiuses review. doh! the sequel to the game that got me into RTS's, and that cemented my computer addiction (it could have gone either way before the orcs marched onto my screen). the fun me and my friends had, playing short skirmish games against the computer while giving each other dodgy tactical advice. i remember that i was so horrendiusly bad at RTS's that i just level skipped through the levels in order to see the end FMV. mind you thats what i did 4 months ago with starcraft.
questions for you promethius :
1) what are the animations like? how do the graphics look when moving? the piccies i have seen failed to really grab my attention, but near everything looks better in motion.
2) how good are the skirmish modes? that was a major complaint of mine about starcraft.
3) what is lag like? im on a 56k aol conection here, so im not holding up much hope, but is it playable at all?
4) what is the build tree and research like? aol style (millions of stuff that take years to research) or red alert style (build for 20 mins and you have everything you need).
5) how detailed is the hero leveling like? and do your heros get transported from one level to the next in campaign mode?
cheers
-
Okay, having posted a fair amount concerning this game, I have to disagree with the review posted on the TWG site. The game is NOTHING NEW. New graphics, yes, but the gameplay is the same as all the older Warcraft titles.
Heroes do keep their levels from level to level, but all heores become inconsequential once the current campaign is done. For example: once the Human campaign is over, Arthus (the paladin dude) ceases to exist. He becomes a deathknight or something in the Undead campaign, but he starts at level 1 again (even if he was a level 10 paladin). Blah.
As for the graphics themselves, the cut scenes are incredible. Despite anything else bad I say about the game, I loved the cutscenes. Blizzard always does a great job with those. The in-game graphics are nothing special...a bit dated and angular. They work for the scope of this game, but they're nothing special.
Like I've said a million times, the tech tree/unit advancement is nothing new. Build a lumber mill to be able to upgrade your town hall to build the next building...blah. By your little ranking system, it's Red Alert style (20 minutes or less and you've got everything).
I was VERY disappointed by the final level. You have to hold off this "huge" invasion force for 45 minutes (real time). I had destroyed the enemy base within the first 15 minutes, and then literally had to sit and idle for 30 minutes before I could beat the game and see the final cutscene.
Nothing special. Bad game? No. Great game? No.
-
1) what are the animations like? how do the graphics look when moving? the piccies i have seen failed to really grab my attention, but near everything looks better in motion.
Done in typical Blizzard style, the models do gain a lot more life when in motion. I think they did a really fantastic job with it, but maybe I'll get 42 to comment on it. He's seen it and is more familiar with that side of things.
2) how good are the skirmish modes? that was a major complaint of mine about starcraft.
Not entirely certain what you mean by skirmish. The skirmish modes I'm familiar with (one player vs. the computer) aren't really spectacular. It's easier to beat the computer 1 on 1 than in Starcraft but only because it does some really stupid things. Computer strategic AI (different from tactical) is pretty unimpressive.
If, however, you mean the battle.net player vs player battles by skirmish, I think it's worlds different (and better) than Starcraft was in this aspect. I spent a lot of words on why I think so in my review, so I will refrain from discussing it further here unless that assertion is contested.
3) what is lag like? im on a 56k aol conection here, so im not holding up much hope, but is it playable at all?
I believe a lot of people play Warcraft III on 56k modems online. They get dropped a lot and lose games because of it, but Blizzard has historically done a very good job of keeping internet traffic down.
4) what is the build tree and research like? aol style (millions of stuff that take years to research) or red alert style (build for 20 mins and you have everything you need).
Not familiar with the aol style you refer to. I don't think I've ever researched my entire tech tree before...it generally isn't necessary to develop all types of units well. To give you an estimate, however, a 20 minute online game pretty much always includes the top tier units. The hardest to reach units require 2 city hall upgrades before you can build thier structures...but that's all you need to do. Those units (gryphons, tauren, chimeras, frost wyrms) tend to be really powerful though. Especially the tauren. Some of them don't see a lot of use. It's technically possible (really stupid, but possible) to start production on your first Tauren 5:10 after the start of the game assuming you start with a basic town hall.
5) how detailed is the hero leveling like? and do your heros get transported from one level to the next in campaign mode?
In the campaign mode, heros carry experience, levels, items, and skill choices over from previous scenarios, though not across campaigns. (Which you don't really notice, as you don't use the same units...except sort of...in one case.) They are restricted in each mission to a particular level, and you don't advance very fast because of it...getting to the high level for each mission isn't a problem at all...plenty of stuff to kill. When a hero levels, they gain hp, mana, small increases to their strength/agility/intelligence stats and damage, and a skill point. This skill point can be spent on 1 of four different skills. The first three are available right away and have 3 degrees of increasing power. The last one is that heros ultimate ability, which can only be selected after achieving sixth level---some of these ultimate abilities are really wild. The Death Knight, for instance, animates the six strongest corpses nearby for two minutes, giving you a huge temporary advantage. The other abilities are less powerful, but can still make a very large difference in how a battle goes. The Paladin's Devotion Aura, for instance, adds 1, 2, or 3 armor to every friendly unit nearby reducing the damage they take. Overall, this isn't a whole ton of variety, especially since all skills can be maxed out at level 10, the highest hero level. The system is simple, however, and is easy to manage in the heat of battle, an attractive feature in a RTS.
-
aol style
argh! i meant age of empires here.
if the skirmish against the computer isnt anything special then i think that i will pass for now. thats the mode that i will play the most.
-
I agree. Online gaming just doesn't appeal to me as much as it does other people (probably because I hate having my butt handed to me routinely by 12-year-old pimply kids with nothing better to do). With rts games, I prefer the single-player campaigns, and Warcraft III, while not bad (at all), just isn't anything special. Except for the cgi movies...
-
I did some of that butt-handing this morning in a one vs one match. It takes some doing, but it really isn't that hard to beat the 12-year olds once you get the game down. Most of them are pretty unimaginative and in their zeal to become better rely too heavily on imitating the techniques of the masters of the game when they're incapable of pulling the same stunts off as the top-ranked players.
At any rate, the point I was trying to reach in my article wasn't that Warcraft III online gaming is for everyone, just that it's vastly superior to any other RTS online gaming I've seen.
-
Really? If Warcraft 3 is the best in online rts gaming right now, the industry needs a swift kick in the pants.
-
I thought we already established that you don't like RTS games. Warcraft III really is a lot of fun, even if you didn't enjoy it.
On a side note, I tried a skirmish mission with the computer in which I teched to taurens as fast as I possibly could. The computer attacked me just as I was getting the first few out, but they were strong enough to drive off the weakling orcs and trolls the computer had brought with them. If it had been a human player rushing me, however, the pain would have come a lot sooner and I would've been in a bad way. Still, if you got away with it, having taurens in the first 10 minutes of the game would be scary in multiplayer.
-
They would, yes. But all the computer (or other player) would have to do is build gargoyles.
-
There's a counter for everything in Warcraft III. Pointing out that there's a counter for something isn't terribly useful. Besides...gargoyles do no real damage...they're one of the worst units in the game. The tauren could level a base before the gargs killed them.
-
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2001-08-31&res=l
this is an old penny arcade strip about War3 adverts. good fun.
oh and saying that you dont like a game due to losing online is a bit silly.your going to get that in any game until you get good (since the 12 yr olds are generally crap) so just practice and then the problem will disappear.
-
hehe http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2879676,00.html
-
These people really should have known better. If Blizzard ever had any patience with cheaters and hackers, it ran out with Diablo II. To me this isn't even all that big of a news item. Just another mass banning of idiots...it's going to be routine for Blizzard for a while I think.
-
Miscellaneous note:
Some guy made the 1500 wins mark recently and got the Deathwing icon, a cool-looking black dragon. It's people like these that make me feel like I have a life. ('only' 212 wins so far)
-
Being as my computer has fallen behind most minimum specs I don't keep up too much with what are the most fun PC games out there.
I was wondering if WC III has withstood the test of a few months. I don't seem to hear about it nor NWN much anymore despite the early hoopla.
Are these games still popular?
-
I've become very disenchanted with NWN. It just can't do all the things I want to do with it.
And I just bought WC3 this weekend. I'm halfway through the Undead (second of four) campaign, and all I can say so far is:
I like StarCraft better.
-
That's fast, Tage. I guess this means you haven't finished Oddworld. (Or that you haven't slept since I saw you Saturday afternoon).
-
I wasn't overly thrilled with Warcraft III's single player missions either, Tage. They were good, but didn't feel quite so inspired I guess. Let me know when you're ready to try War3 bnet out, though. I've been waiting for a teammate to play with. ;) As I said in my review, that's where the game really begins to shine.
I've got some other things to say, but I'm starting to get the feeling that World of Warcraft is going to become big enough that it's needing it's own thread.
Has anyone else watched the new Starcraft: Ghost gameplay trailer yet?
-
So I got Warcraft 3 as an early Christmas present the other day, and ever since I've been mercilessly critiquing it yet completely unable to stop playing. It has so many problems, and yet it's so freaking fun. How does Blizzard do that?
-
Heh. It goes right along with your current tagline. Let me know when you guys want to try it online. I've been waiting for some good Warcraft partners. ;)
-
Well keep waiting, sonny; it will be a long time before any of us catch up with your level of Warcraftery.
I have to say, though, that my love for all things undead holds up admirably in this game. Yay!
-
I've been saving up for a new computer and if Santa is good to me this year I'll have enough for one after the holidays. Can you guess what my first game purchase will be?
God, I love Warcraft!
Did anyone besides me actually play the original? It might just be nostalgia speaking, but in some aspects it outshone even its sequel. What a hoot!
It's hard to deny that Blizzard just makes good, fun games.
-
I played the original when it first came out. I'd been hooked on the whole RTS thing by Dune 2, and when I saw a fantasy RTS I was pretty excited about it. Things have changed a lot since then, but WC3 does a nice job of bringing in some of the nostalgiac elements (and elementals) of the original.
-
I tried the original, but it was after I'd played Warcraft II for a bit, and it was too clunky to use...sort of like going back to II after playing III. And when I said good Warcraft III partners, I was referring to something far more than sheer playing skill. I meant that you guys would have a brain. Seriously, after playing a few hundred games with random partners pulled from somewhere or other off the Internet, it helps. A lot. I have an account called TraningAcademy other than my ClanWolf primary account I use to brush up my skills after not playing for a while so I don't mess up ClanWolf's record, so anytime you guys want to try a team game, I'm good for it.
-
I've got to second that, Prometheus. There's no video game experience quite as fun as Battlenet with friends. I was an RA (Residential Advisor) for a couple years back in undergrad. That meant a few late nights a month where I would have to patrol the hall and make sure it wasn't burning, etc. Anyway, when they finally got the whole campus networked a bunch of us RAs would play Starcraft all night long while on duty. We'd take on all comers and man was it a good time.
If there's one thing I learned by playing all those games online, its this: Beware the Red Zerg.
Seriously.
:)
-
I've been having trouble with the Orcs--they're a lot harder to play, I think, than the defensive Humans or the efficient Undead. Can those of you with more experience offer some advice?
-
Just endure your way through the campaigns. They're not really that hard, if you just build a lot of guys, but they're not very exciting. And orcs were my least favorite race. Their ending cinematic, however, was the best one in the whole game.
-
Here's a tip I've found to be quite helpful: a full group of one raiders supported by a Kodo Beast can really tear towns apart. I'm still not certain that 12 raiders are better than 12 catapults for pure city-bashing, but they're more versatile and much faster.
-
Any advice we gave would be dependent on the units the given mission allows you to use, so it's hard to hand it out in any general sort of way. Feel free to ask if you get stuck, though. And don't panic at the beginning of that one Orc mission. (That was really helpful, huh?)
-
Here's a quickie... I'm on dial up (free through school) and I'm keen on playing WC3 on Bnet as I just ordered a new computer (yeah!). Now Diablo 2 played extremely well over dial up, far beyond my expectations in fact. Does anyone else play WC3 on dial up? Is it worthwhile or an exercise in frustration?
-
I honestly can't say, since all I have is sweet, sweet broadband. Starcraft always worked great on dial-up, though, so maybe this is the same.
-
Blizzard is pretty good about keeping their games somewhat less connection intensive than most. I can't be sure either since I have a cable modem at home, but I seem to remember chatting with folks that claimed to be able to play Warcraft III fine over a 56K modem line. The big problem you'll run into is that getting thrown out of a game is a death sentence for your time in that game. There's no way back. It used to be, however, that getting disconnected always caused a loss, and I believe that a recent patch changed that so that if your team pulled through anyway you get a win instead. I haven't played WC3 enough since the patch to really know.
I'm getting back from Mexico tomorrow night, although I'm not entirely certain how we're going to get back to Provo from the airport yet. Is anyone almost ready for some light WC3 bnet action? I'd like to play soon. ;)
-
As long as it's all of us against you, I'm certainly up for it. And if you don't think that's fair, just wait until you see how badly we suck at the game.
-
Hey, I have a 100% win record so far...out of two games.
-
Or we could just do arranged teams together. Or something. There's lots of fun Warcrafting to do out there...I need to get the ClanWolf account to the blue drake icon sometime soon. I'm almost there.
-
Rundown of my day:
10:30am : Wake up (I'm still on vacation), shower.
10:45am: Answer door for friendly UPS man who has my new computer. Help friendly UPS man carry computer up the stairs.
11am: Disassemble old computer, clean computer area thouroughly
11:30am: lunch
Noon: Assemble new computer
12:30p: Install WCIII
4:30p: Finally stop playing WCIII
4:35p: Go for a jog
5:30p: Get some Subway
7p: Play WCIII...until now (10ish)
Man, I love vacation. Just got through the human campaign...a little cheesier than Starcraft, even. More straightforward too. Great graphics and gameplay though. I've got to say that it's all I hoped for. Now on to undead...
-
And the Hive obtains another member. It'd be funny if we put together an international TWG Warcraft III clan.
-
I say we ought to set up a time for all of us to meet online and play.
-
I'd be all for that. I played a game on bnet and it ran smooth as could be on my dial up. I don't know how Blizzard does that, but they do it well.
Of course, I'm terrible since I just started playing today. I tried to use my old Starcraft techniques and they really don't fly in WCIII. I got smacked around, but he ended up quitting before I did...heh
I really like the replay feature. I've been going over my film a bit to see where I messed up and what he was doing.
My best time to play is certainly in the evening and at night, but all that will change once my vacation ends on monday. I'm in Central time, by the way.
-
Isn't that what I've been saying for months now? ;D *Dodges thrown bottle*
Central time is easy enough to work with. A lot better than whatever it is they have in Great Britan. Don't worry about being good enough or anything like that. Fell and Tage are fairly new as well, and I haven't played it all that much recently, so I'm a bit rusty. That, and it doesn't really matter anyway...it's just a game. We'll find a good team strategy that works for us before too long I'm sure.
-
Okay, how does this sound: my baby goes to sleep (assuming all goes as planned) at 8:30 or 9:00, so what if we play at 9? That would be 10 for Pleasington, which might be too late, but lateness rarely stands in the way of warcraft. If you like we can try to start earlier. Everyone who reads this message and wants to come, please post your feedback here and we'll all get together tonight in the kwark channel.
-
I should be able to make it.
-
10pm late? Hah! I scoff at 10pm! I've been hitting the hay around 3am since I've been off...I'm a night owl.
So is that 10pm tonight? As in the 8th? If so, I'll certainly be there!
I just can't remember if it matters which Bnet server you connect to...I think I'm connected to Bnet East.
looking forward to it...
-
Yes, that is tonight, and yes, it DOES matter which server you're on. We're all going to be on USWest, so you'll want to switch over to that one.
-
Cool. My brother-in-law will be there too, so we're going to have a pretty good group. If EUOL would buy his own copy instead of mooching off of Tage, he could play with us too.
-
I can come, but I'll be late, so go ahead and start without me. I'm busy until 10PM Mountain time. I'm pretty sure the US West Server is Lordaeron...that's the one I've been playing on, anyway.
-
Yeah, it's Lordaeron. I like how they give them names now.
I'm glad of glad you'll be late, actually--it will give the rest of us a chance to get in the groove before you come and destroy us. We'll be playing for a while, though, so there will be plenty of time to destroy us once you get there :)
By the way, did I tell everyone about my monitor yet? I bought a 21" monitor over ebay (saved about 300 bucks), and we hooked it up yesterday. The thing's a freaking beast, and takes up the whole desk. It makes shooters and stuff a lot more fun (I used to be on a tiny 15"), but it actually makes WC3 kind of hard because everything's so big and so dang close to my face. I need to work out a better desk arrangement. But anyway, my monitor is enormous and very cool and I love it. Yay!
-
I had in mind to do Team Games in conjunction with everyone and go beat up on someone else's team. I also doubt I could defeat 3 armies, even if you guys aren't quite up to speed. I'm sure we'll find a way to have fun anyhow, though...what channel should we meet in?
-
Might as well be channel "TWG"
That would make it easy.
-
Well, that was certainly fun! Sure, I lost a lot...and I was pink a lot, but I also learned a lot. I think I have a much better grasp on humans now.
If anyone wants them, I have the replays of all our games (I think). I watched the last one and it was pretty entertaining. Watching Rob send wave after wave of those frickin' spirit wolves is pretty funny now that I don't have to deal with it. I guess Militia can be useful :)
Great fun, we'll have to do it again.
-
Email me the replays, Pleasington, and I'll upload them to the site.
The games, as he said, were loads of fun, even though I got my butt handed to me several times. The 4v4 arranged team game was an eye-opener, considering the enormous wave of bloodlusted Abominations that swept through our entire side of the board more or less unopposed. We also played an 8-person free-for-all, filling the other slots with computers. Ah, such fun.
We definitely need to do this again, and if we can do it before monday Pleasington will still be on vacation.
-
Well I'm sad I missed it, but I should have a working power supply by the end of today. I hope ya'll plan another one soon.
-
Friday night would work for me, but I don't know if Tage and EUOL will be playing D&D or not.
-
Sadly, the only other good night for me is tonight since I'm going to see a friend this weekend. Once school starts I won't be able to play as late or as often, but I'll still be able to play.
I'll get you those replays, fell
-
Whee! Friday night!
Your comments about our last game were funny. If you're wondering, I was doing an abnormally good job of creeping in the early part of that game...it wasn't just quite normal. You were facing a much more standard Nate orc army that time, though. Taurens and Shamans to bloodlust them. No matter how scary lusted aboms are, lusted tauren are five times worse.
-
Fell was saying last night that he might not be able to show on time to a Warcraft III game tonigh, and I just got invited to a party for tonight, so I probably won't be there either...do we want to reschedule for Saturday or something?
-
So is anyone else up for some Warcraft III gaming tonight? My ClanWolf account needs just one more win to get the next icon, and it'd be cool if I did it in a team with my friends.
-
I have a date with my wife; otherwise I'd be glad to help you win your icon. Slay a dragon for me (or at least a footman).
-
Rob and I met by chance on Sunday night and got to play some. We played some AT and despite initial success, we got schooled a few times. We kept fighting higher level clans. It was fun though.
-
Hey all,
I had a bunch of classes cancelled today and postponed tommorow so I plan on being on Bnet tonight probably starting around 9 or 10 pm Central time if anyone would like to join me.
Also, Rob, I watched the replay of the game we won and its hilarious. Neither opponent made troops at all...the human was towering himself in and the orc was going shamans. That's why there was no resistance at all :)
-
That was one of the banes of early battle.net Warcraft III play...people who were still used to starcraft's 'bunker-in' philosophy, and proceeded to tower up. It really is an awful way to play the game. I think the main reason is that, unlike Starcraft, you have no real hopes of ever expanding to a new mine since you lack an effective fighting force to clear the creeps away. Your heros will also be pathetic. Teching to shamans and witch doctors is a generally accepted 'good strategy' now, and I see it all the time even in the higher level games. So long as you can look scary enough to survive the initial rushes and such, you can build a large army of witch doctors and shamans that can take on most other forces easily enough. I personally think making an orc army without meele fighters is kinda pathetic, but the strategy does work.
It's funny sometimes to see two such armies battling it out on replays. With low damage attacks, healing wards in full presence, and typically little focus fire, the two armies pound on each other for what seems like an eternity. I have one good replay of such a situation, where the other armies involved ground themselves into a pulp over and over on the same battlefield while the two orc armies just stuck around and kept shooting at each other.
I'll try to be on tonight...9 pm central is 10 pm mountain, right?
-
switch that, reverse it.
9pm Central is 8pm Mountain. So I'll probably hop on b/t 8 and 9 your time and be on until midnight unless I get bored earlier.
-
Sounds good. Those time zones can be confusing unless you sit down to do the math, and I didn't feel like it. I'm more used to converting to pacific time anyway, so I probably just did that. See you in Kwark channel.
-
I may or may not be there, but I'll send out a few emails to make sure everyone knows the news.
-
You forgot to mention, Fell that you weren't just right next to me in that game, but you ventured into my turf early on too. (If you watch my resources during the ensuing battles, you'll also see I nearly expended myself trying to kill you--and I had help. It wasn't as bad a game for you as it looks. Cadamis was the one who really got beat up early.)
-
If by "ventured into my turf" you mean "wandered off looking for creeps and found an enormous army instead," then yes, I did. And yes, just about everyone in the game lent you a hand in my demise, but I didn't want to be overly whiny. Somewhat whiny, but not overly so.
I like this game more every time I play it. Yay!
-
I was? I got trounced fairly late in the game, I thought.
-
I think what he meant was that after that initial beating (which you did recover from) you weren't a threat for a long time as you boxed in and built up.
I'm starting to get a better grasp on the game though I'm in a bit of a losing slump (despite one big victory today). Any tips from the masters here would be helpful. :)
-
Yeah, when I said Cadamis got beat up on, I meant that early thrashing the frost wyrms gave him. He did a good job of recovering after that, but the continued threat of the wyrms led him to invest in ancient protectors and such, and he wasn't able to build enough of an army after that. That and he didn't know chimeras can't shoot air. That didn't help either. Honestly though, I'm glad I didn't get hit by that early wyrm attack. That wouldn't have been easy to handle.
That map surprised me. The lack of extra gold supplies makes it very tricky to win the game unless you wipe someone out and take theirs.
-
So when do we want to try again?
-
We just played again last night, and I used the opportunity to work on a strategy that involves *not* building an Ancient of War. Pure druids and hippogryphs, with the occasional chimeara thrown in for siege support.
It worked pretty well last night, but it's slower than molassas, so I have my doubts how well it'd go over in a standard multiplayer game.
-
Last night's game, by the way, was unplanned--we just happened to find each other online. The buddy list is nice for that.
-
I've been bumping into Rob a lot that way. Buddy lists are nice. 8)
People online tech straight to dryads fairly often, but some of the others take longer. I'm not a big chimera fan myself. In multiplayer team games, those who tower themselves in too much tend to lose by not controlling enough of the map, and chimeras are really only all that effective against buildings. I don't like hippos much either. They die too fast if anything starts hitting them. Bear druids, however, are incredible units if you can ever get all their upgrades. Even put up against knights and abominations, they do quite well. Due to a faster attack rate, they actually do more damage than any other ground unit except tauren. When I do bear armies, I try to keep one unmorphed so he can cast Rejuvination and Roar if I remember to. My internet was down for a bit today, so I started working on undead building schemes. I tried an all-banshees (and getting those banshees fast) make, and it did very well in the first game I tried it. The second game...wasn't so good. It'll be interesting to see if I can make it work in multiplayer. I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys cooked up together.
-
Yeah, I really hated to bail last night as things were getting interesting, but I had an early class which I had to wake up even earlier for to compensate for projected traffic as we were supposed to get between four and six inches of snow last night. We got a dusting, so that was nice.
I really like undead. Last night was the first time I'd played them in mp and I did fairly well with them. Fell and I were in a constant see-saw battle, though I think he was slowly gaining the upper hand before I left. If you watch the replay you'll see me send troops into his base several times...to be destroyed several times. I always neglect to build siege equipment and that really hurt me that game as my boys could do little once I broke into his base. An accidental run in with some of the dragons at a mine also wiped out about half of my troops before one attack...I was not pleased.
Fun game though. Who ended up winning?
-
In the end Tage pulled it out, mainly do to his bustling economy. I had a pretty good set-up, and our armies would annihilate each other every time they met, but he outproduced me by a wide margin and eventually all I could do was watch.
-
I can certainly vouch that you had a good setup. Between that and the fact that everytime I'd be moving towards your base, you'd be moving towards mine I had little overall chance of doing any real damage.
-
Raging_Rob and I won on Arranged Teams! Hooray!
Rob was making necromancers and I was on the orcs with shamans and tauren. We stomped em pretty bad too.
I also messed around with my router a bit, so now I can create custom games and invite to arranged teams. This mostly a note for Pleasington. We met online last night, but neither of us could start a game. :-[
-
Yes, Prometheus, that was a sad night when neither of us could set up an AT. Glad to hear you have the problem fixed.
I'll actually be on Bnet quite a bit this weekend since most the folks I know have left town for MLK weekend, giving me very little to do.
Hope to see you all on there.
-
When do we want to set up another gaming time? It's fun to meet people online by happenchance, but the most fun when we have lots of people there.
-
I went over the replay of that last game before I went to bed and if these guys are any indication, I'm teching entirely too fast for that type of game. Perhaps I'm rushing to knights too quickly and should spend some time getting a goodly number of footies.
I guess only time will tell.
Great fun, even despite losing :)
-
I'm not sure that teching speed was your problem. I think it might have been just a little too fast, but one of the other big problems was the major loss of footmen you suffered fighting the spiders earlier. I'm not sure why that battle turned out quite so poorly for you...I've taken on those spider clusters before and not lost nearly so many men. Maybe I had a few more footmen before I tried taking them on, or perhaps they had an offensive upgrade.
The one thing I noticed about all of us (myself included that game, I usually do a better job of it.) was that we didn't have enough troop producers. By the time the big battle started, we had a total of five active troop producers among the three teams, and that isn't nearly enough for online play. The only races I've found that should stick with just one of their initial troop producers is the undead and the orcs, unless they intend to use those buildings throughout the game. Ancients of War and Barracks both produce good enough troops that a double count of them early on is very justifiable even if you plan to go on to something else. Teching straight to X unit is another matter, but that's a gamble that the team can decide to take together.
I'm not sure why, but we were also missing Fell for the major conflict. He came in, but only after my army was completely gone, and I think Pleasington had about one knight left. One thing I've found in base defenses is that it's often best to let the enemy chew on the base just a little bit while you and your allies get coordinated for their jump back to the base that's being attacked. Under the firepower of three or even four enemy battle groups, one or two friendly armies are almost never enough to turn the tide. We didn't do that and we paid for it.
I also made the mistake of trying to use night elves on the front line of the battle. I should have been shooting over the heads of Pleasington's forces. Huntresses, incidentally, can throw their moon glaives over the heads of footmen and ghouls...maybe knights and grunts too, and should usually be behind them in battle to focus the total team firepower.
One thing we might want to try out is having all members of our teams tech striaght to high level units, gambling that the enemy won't attack early, and use our heros in one big pack to creep together. Six heros is a formidable creeping force, particularly if they have spirit wolves and/or water elementals available.
-
Those spiders really did chew me up and I'm not sure why either. There was one big surprise to me while watching the replay though...there actually are little creeps on that map. I thought it was only tougher ones so I went for hte spiders. I had no idea there were merfolk scattered everywhere.
The only thing about going straight tech is that it does leave us really vulnerable in early game which is where we're getting hit anyway.
I agree on troop producers though. I was building my second barracks when I got nailed. Definitely some things to think about.
-
Creep location is one of the big advantages of replays. Some maps have weak creeps, some don't, and it can make a big difference in play style. Crucible, for example, has a tough group of creeps nearby, and also a set of golems. The trick there is that dreadlords can't use any of their initial abilities on the magic immune golems, making them a worse choice for that map. A Death Knight or Lich work better there if they fit with your play style at all.
The weak creeps on that swamp map we played on are one of my favorite things about it, as I can go beat on them and level my hero just a tad while I wait for more troops to come online, as well as boost my gold economy a little. Sometimes I even try to steal a weak group of creeps away from my opponents.
The problem of whether or not to tech is a tough one. It's impossible to tell, in my experience, whether the other team will creep/tech themselves, and whether you have time to do it. Perhaps a better idea would be to have all members of the group agree to a rough teching speed, so that when our armies hit an effective level, they all do it together, and no one is left in the dust. Although it isn't my sort to strategy, we could also practice hero rushing. One big benefit a skilled group of hero rushers does get is that they usually can build their bases in peace for a while their opponents recover. As long as we don't resort to that stupid Archmage/Blizzard trick, I'm fine with it.
-
I just tried that battle Pleasington had vs the spiders in our game out a couple times, and using all the creep hunting tricks I knew, I couldn't get it to come out significantly better, and sometimes it came out worse.
This brings up another point, however. Watching the game on a creeping level rather than a building order level, I noticed another big difference between us and our opponents. They creeped together while we creeped alone. This allowed them to maintain a large firepower advantage over the creeps, and they suffered hardly any losses, while ours were significant. They were also able to kill bigger creeps and have better heroes. That's another area we need to improve in. Looking at everything, though, we aren't that far off. There's a few things we need to brush up on teamwork-wise, but if a few things had happened differently (those things would have made a large difference) we could've taken them.
-
Again, I agree completely. I've had a streak of wins in 3v3 RT in the last week or so and in virutally all of them we combined forces to creep. The only disadvantage is that each hero gets less XP, but that's offset by the amount of creeps they can take down.
We actually did that once last night, in the first game, when Prometheus remembered that the Shamans in the middle had good treasure.
-
You can't comprehend how much this conversation is reinforcing my dislike of Arranged Team games.
-
The inevitable has arrived: http://www.blizzard.com/war3x/
No new race, but some incredibly cool-looking new units and intriguing ideas (like player-built shops and hirable neutral heroes). Yay!
-
Yeah, that does look cool. The Blood Mage is giving a whole new dimension of darkness to the Human side...kinda creepy. It'll be interesting to see how he fits into the story.
I don't get, however, how the discussion above led you to dislike AT games more. Random team games have the same considerations...you just don't have any way to prepare ahead of time for everything. The only thing I can think of is that you dislike either ladder team games or having teammates in general. I could be reading it wrong, though.
-
After thinking about it for a bit and then reading Gamespy's article on the new expansion here: http://www.gamespy.com/interviews/january03/war3tft/ I know what is on my wishlist, and also that I already have some of it.
One of the strategies that has become epidemic in Warcraft ladder games is caster-only armies. Whether it be sorceresses and priests, shamans and witch doctors, or necromancers, pure forms of these units have ruled the board for months now. The only solid counter to those armies I can think of right away is the spell immune dryads, which is why you see so many all-dryad armies. While part of me wants to gripe about not liking spellcaster-only armies being viable, let alone extremely powerful, I'm going to take a more moderate approach and just say that my wish list was that there were more ways to counter spellcasting armies, which I expect would lower their incidence and push the average army toward a more combined-arms approach. (which I think would be a very welcome change)
I found out in the Gamespy article that I have at least partially gotten my wish. The humans have an announced spell-immune unit now...the blood elf spell breaker. Normally you won't see these guys in large numbers, but when set against spellcaster-only armies, they will likely clean up. Hopefully the orcs and undead will get at least one spell immune unit as well. It'll be so much fun if I ever get to mob a sorceress-only army with spell breakers.
-
I never play non-AT ladder games, so I didn't think to mention them, but your deduction is correct--I don't like ladder games in general. Warcraft, to me, is not about knowing the map ahead of time and getting the creeps in the right order.
As for AT games specifically, I have yet to play one that wasn't a rout--I either annihilate someone or I get annihilated. There's no close calls, and none of the long battles I liked so much in starcraft. Maybe my issue is with the game itself at some level, but I'm going to take it out on AT games for now.
-
Overall, you're right about the length of Warcraft III games. Blizzard intended for them to be of roughly half an hour in length, and not many of them fall very far outside of that. If you play for a while (and not necessarily as long as I have) you will see some long games, and a large number of close calls, but it is somewhat routish nowadays.
Map familiarity has long been an important part of RTS games. Starcraft had natural choke points and resource clusters that it was important to gain control of, ect. Creeps enhance that effect somewhat, as it also helps to know where creeps are and roughly what it takes to defeat them without significant casualties. Playing with partners in AT games can help to ease the pain of this somewhat if you start creeping with partners, but it is an unfortunate side effect of having creeps.
As far as ladder games in general go...there are just certain things you have to learn and apply to be competitive, but this is a facet of all online games I know of...even MUDs. I still hold, however, that our AT teams aren't terribly far off from being successful. We've got a couple tricks to learn, but the edge between success and failure in Warcraft is thin and sharp. All we have to do is cross it.
-
I'm not seeing anything new on Warcraft Extravaganzas, but it was moved to the top of the article list today...do we know what happened?
-
There are five new replays...you just have to scroll down to get them. :)
-
I thought I did. Either they've appeared since then (I see them now) or I was being an idiot again without knowing it. How did you like the job I did in the 1v2v2? I was pleased with myself...if only I'd thought to hide a farm somewhere so I could have tried to keep my mountain king in play longer...
-
Is anyone else still interested in playing Warcraft III online? I haven't been seeing TWG folks on battle.net recently, and thus haven't seen much of a reason to play myself. I'd still like to finish off ClanWolf's blue drake with someone I know in an AT game, as well as play some of our zany little custom games. Any takers?
-
I've been getting a quick 3v3 in just about every other day. Time hasn't permitted me much more, I'm afraid. I could be on tonight around 10 if there was such a desire...not that we've had much luck together in AT, Prometheus :)
I've also noticed the lack of TWG people on of late...which makes me want to play less since it's always more fun to play with people you know (even if you just kind of know them through an internet message board).
-
Agreed. It's a lot more fun to play with people you know, which is why I'm trying to drum up interest if any such remains.
As for our AT games, we weren't doing too badly at all last time we played. We didn't win, but we were getting a lot closer. I'll try to be on a little after 10 Mountain time tonight. (Yes I know that's different from 10 your time...it's also when I happen to get home on Wednesdays.)
-
Victory on battle.net!
My ClanWolf account achieved its 250th random win last night in an AT game with Pleasington for my blue drake icon, and we came within one win of getting Pleasington his 25th human win for the footman icon.
-
I too sing the songs of victory!
I finally got my Footman icon this weekend and have started mixing it up and playing other races a bit.
Secondly, I got tree rushed in one game. Have you guys seen this? I wish I would have snagged that replay. Basically, somone planted their Ancient of War a little ways outside my base (like a tower rush) and was proceeding to build archers when I found it. I was able to do some damage to it, but it kept eating trees and kept my hero tied up for a long time. Finally my teammates arrived and help me put it down. A pretty bad move, IMO, but pretty effective at distraction me for a while. Wouldn't have been a big problem had my teams showed up earlier. :)
-
Man, I hardly ever see anyone else on anymore. We should organize another night where everyone can be there. I'm possibly available this Thurs night...
-
Thursday night is bad for Fell and I. We have a meeting scheduled then. I would like to meet again on bnet sometime. Warcraft III custom games are too fun and we didn't do them for long enough. I'll pester some folks over here and find out if they're still interested at all or not.
-
I've been a bit busy of late, but I'll be on Bnet tonight probably after 10:30 Central time. If people are on, I'll stay, otherwise I'll be on for a half hour or so.
-
i always do this. buy a game just after the interest in it has faded. its practically a habit.
Warcraft 3 = in my possession.
not much else to say, really. if online games are still on the menu its entirely possible for me to join in, as long as its morning or early afternoon USA time when we start - britain is 5-7 hours ahead, depending on the US timezone.
-
That sounds like fun, but I don't know when we'd be able to play during those hours...the weekend maybe. We'll have to keep it in mind.
-
rah. im about to start the undead campaign. thoughts so far :
1) no ships? i suppose its since naval vessels (as in being able to build em) dont fit into a skirmish game, which is what this is. Its what Age of Empires is, but the designers are too proud to admit that their engine sucks with regards to having decent numbers of units on screen.
2) niiiiiiice videos. the one at the end of the human campaign was pretty stupid tho.
3) the manual sucks. itd be nice if it said stuff like what units are good against what. but all it says is whether its ranged/melee and what it can shoot at.
4) B.net is nice. my brand new ADSL line is proving its worth now. precisely 0% lag. oh and i won my first match. admittedly because my ally got my to activate shared units, and relegated me to base building guy while he romped around with my units & hero, but hey.
5) the human sorceroress... the obligatory "funny" unit.
6) nice water graphics. although they seem fond of having ponds that have about a million gallons of water pouring out of them a second, but no apparent methods for water to get inside the pond. wierd.
[edit] Ugh. i suck at B.net. 2 wins, 7 losses. yay.[/edit]
-
Speaking of bnet, I've been introduced to a b.net custom game called Defense of the Ancients that we should try out as a group. It is far and away the best custom map I've seen out of b.net. I've already shown Rob it and he didn't seem to enjoy his first game much, but that was because we got stomped on I think. If anyone else wants to know more about it or is interested in trying it, let me know.
-
Man, I've been so busy that I feel like I haven't popped onto Bnet in forever. I'm going to try to be on Thursday night around 10 pm central time. I'm "Pleasington" for those who haven't seen me on before.
I guess I kind of lost motivation after getting my foot soldier avatar :)
-
Don't expect many of us on Thursday night--that's our writing group.
-
I found a new place to get detailed statistics on battle.net ladder games & such. So, for those with a demented sense of curiousity:
ClanWolf Stats as of Feb 21, 2003
Maximum Win Streak: 14
Maximum Loss Streak: 8
Total Units Produced: 21,827
Total Units Killed: 24,438
Total Heroes Killed: 963
Total Gold Mined: 5,915,989
Avg. Gold Per Min: 549
Never lost as the Night Elves on map Battleground
Most Used Hero: Paladin 91 times
Least Used Hero: Keeper of the Grove 7 times
Hero with Highest Win rate: Tauren Chieftan 76.8%
Hero with Lowest Win rate: Archmage 55.0%
50 to 60 Minute game length win rate: 77.8%
http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/war3-player-reports-overall.aspx?Gateway=Lordaeron&PlayerName=ClanWolf
-
So...anyone still play on Bnet? I haven't logged in of late (no time), but I'm going to soon so my account isn't deleted.
That 2 week period where we all played was a lot of fun. We should try to meet up again.
-
I've been playing on bnet a lot lately. Me and my friend have been duking it out on the US East server. I'm Gemm, if I wasn't be subtle there.
-
I'm waiting for the expansion to come out before picking up the game again. I simply can't stand the game balance as it currently is.
-
True Tage. I'm in the beta and I've seen some improvments made. I think the addition of another hero balances things a bit as well. But I've been having some trouble with my copy or Warcraft 3, in that after a couple hours of no play it gives me some CD-ROM error that it can't find the disc, even though the disc is right there. Bah, so its come down to me having to uninstall/reinstall each time this happens.
-
Hey yall!
Lets just say ive played Warcraft 3 alot since its release and im actually pretty good at it.
Ive played alot with top players (and beating them too!) so i got a pretty good scope at the game so if you want some tips feel free to ask ;)
But my days are over.. im gonna try doing something useful for a change.. ;D
Anyway.. ive played blizz games since Warcraft 2 and enjoyed them all, especially the Diablo series, so im hoping for Diablo 3.
Looking forward to WoW also!
Other predictions... maybe an FPS but im sceptic on that.. perhaps theyll make something completely new?
Like creating a new genre?
No matter what they end up doin it will probably be great!
Regarding Starcraft Ghost.. im not the biggest fan of those kinds of games.. but it looks pretty good!
woops long post :o
-
Uh, welcome to our forum. I don't think anyone here has played WC3 recently, but the expansion looks cool. We are fans of the Blizzard in general, though, as this week's poll shows.
-
welcome to the forum dude, and congratulations on your new life without warcraft
-
Haha Gargamel :O
ill try to keep my hands off the expansion in order to make my life healthier !! ;D
-
use the phorce fastcar17 i know you can do it
-
phorce? ok that's a spelling error I can make fun of
-
Ok, so i just bought the expansion.
New tilesets? I wont say no.
New Orc hero who can actually heal people? I'm all ears brother.
5 Neutral heros and transport boats? It sounds good.
The ability to set the ground on fire with the Orc catapult? Gimme!
Oh, you can now start clans that have their own channels and clan-ratings and stuff. We ought to start a TWG one. But you need at least 10 people...
-
I've only played a small bit, since my computer enjoy's annoying me anytime I try to play Warcraft 3 and now its expansion, but I must say the addition of boats is what I'm sure everyone's been waiting for. I've used the transport ships and galley's or warships, I'm not sure if you can get the warships in multiplayer mode.
I won't be playing this full throttled until I get my new computer soon.
-
The boats are meh. Most maps do not use them. I like the new heros - they all seem good, and i cannot wait to try out the Elven Blood mage, with his Phoenix (i wonder if blizzard likes harry potter?). However, in the one skirmish i have played so far, i used the Tauren/Farseer combination. So the new orc hero remains a nifty backup, but non-essential new hero. The campaign missions so far are pretty much the same level as last time. Maybe a bit harder. It has a lot of small gameplay tweaks as well.
-
Oh yeah, that came out, didn't it? I'll go pick it up sometime.
-
I just found out that the account experience levels are reset for the expansion. Clan Wolf is 250+ wins down and level 1 all over again. ;)
Anyone want to play custom/ladder team?
-
I think it's high time we start playing this game together again (mostly because I'm bored with comp stomps). If anyone wants to look for me online, I'll be in the kwark channel at 9:30 or 10:00 tonight.
-
What server? East or West? Even though my internet connection will most likely not let me play anyways. I will be tryin'!! Yargg!
-
West, matey, and mountain time.
-
And in english/eastern time that is?
-
Arr, ye scurvy landlubbers, 10 pm mountain time is midnight eastern time (and 9 pacific time).
-
Oh, and make sure to download the bonus maps on www.blizzard.com, if possible.
-
I'd love to play, but theres two factors about me not playing right now.
1- I tried to install FT and it gave me error #131. I know how to fix it, but its a pain in the ass.
2- My campus' net connection will most likely not allow me to connect to b.net anyways, and if I did I would just lag.
-
For those who didn't show up on the 19th (a fairly exclusive group including Fell and myself) we decided that snap-second game gatherings weren't as good an idea as it had seemed at the time. We also decided we should try again, but this time with some more time before we started. Most of you know I'm good for a Warcraft game most any time. When do we want to play?
-
Hey, about some Starcraft?
-
Whichever, so long as we know in advance. I think I could find my Starcraft CDs in a short amount of time...pretty sure.
-
Thread Necromancy!
So I started playing again after beating Prince of Persia and remembering how fun this game is. I really need to get that expansion sometime.
How long's it been since we played together? A year? We need to reinstate that, it was a good time.
-
I just couldn't ever get into the multiplayer aspect of this game. The orc campaigns introduced in the expansion were incredible, and the rest of the campaigns were fun, but for some reason I just can't play it like I played Starcraft.
-
While I agree that Starcraft is a better game and a more balanced multiplayer experience, WCIII is still a metric boatload of fun.
I broke down and finally got the expansion today.
So...any takers on a gamenight in the near future?
-
Yes, assuming its at a sane time for me :)
If anyone wants a game, name a time tomorrow, or friday, and i will show up. I'll probably be babbling about flying helicopters in Desert Combat, but there you go.
-
Yeah, those helicopters are a b**** to fly in that game. Why does it have to be so difficult.
-
I could probably play late Friday night, or late Sunday.
-
Eh. It only took me a short while and instruction from a friend to get proficient at them, and i can use them moderately well now. Still can't hover though.
-
I'm busy Thursday with Prerelease Tactics #2 for the CCG side of things, Friday night with roleplaying since Fell's party is Saturday, and Saturday with Fell's party. Sunday night works though. I haven't broken out my trusty orcish waraxe in a while.
-
Just to clarify, I'm assuming that this will be the non-expansion version of Warcraft III?
-
I'm good for Sunday night.
Yeah, we'll do non-expansion if someone doesn't have it (assuming I can still play non expansion with expansion installed).
Dabu!
-
You can. There should be a separate startup icon for the basic Warcraft III game.
-
I'm waiting in the Warcraft III room TWG.
-
I just got on.
I'll be on WCIII in room TWG until about 11 central time, maybe a bit later.
My user name is Pleasington
-
Me and Prometheus tried earlier, but I timed out and such. So no go for me.