Why do we want things in thee game? Anti-editor thread

[Kuniworth]

I'm a bit annoyed with people saying that the editor can take care of things when you propose an improvement. So now once and for all let me clearify why I want certain things in the game;

1. The standard scenarios will be the ones played in league-gaming etc, so that means that for example if the commander-file aint accurate there will a lasting problems with this.

2. Implementing things early means that playtesting will be able to balance them instead of us alter certain things after.

Now do everyone get this? Editor is good to have but I want the standard scenarios to be good.

[ May 16, 2005, 06:56 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

[J P Wagner]

Perhaps you can edit your snotty mood!

[Kuniworth]

Maybe, if you edit your mood to be more gay(gay=happy).

[jon_j_rambo]

Kuniworth is right, we need some type of standard, with a playtested game. Else, it will turn into some whacky game with all kinds of settings. Go play StrongHold-2 if you want an editor.

[pzgndr]

Playtesting and balancing the standard scenarios for competitive play is a goal, no doubt about that. But tell me, where is THE competition scenario mod that EVERYONE uses for SC1 league competition?? No bids, no tweaks, no nothing -- just the plain vanilla scenario. It's not out there. Why? Because everyone has different tastes, different abilities that need to be handicapped, etc. So you need a decent Editor.

And then there are the solo gamers looking for a challenge from the AI. You don't have that either except for a mod, and even then the AI has its limits. So you need a decent Editor.

And then there are those players who want to create their very own game. New map, new units, new everything. So again, you need a decent Editor.

The good news is that players should be able to play the standard scenarios straight out of the box and never have to worry about the SC2 Editor. But it's going to be there regardless. For those who want it.

[Hubert Cater]

Yes, I actually think Kuni has a strong point here. Let's face it, the campaigns will undoubtedly be perfect and absolutely satisfy everyone's idea of what should and should not be in them so no real need for an editor at all.

On the flip-side though, for those who *might* actually disagree with any of the design decisions, that will be very unlikely (read above arguments), and for those who might actually want to tinker with the game and create new scenarios/campaigns... well you guys will be out of luck

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by pzgndr:

And then there are the solo gamers looking for a challenge from the AI. You don't have that either except for a mod, and even then the AI has its limits. So you need a decent Editor.

And then there are those players who want to create their very own game. New map, new units, new everything. So again, you need a decent Editor.

The good news is that players should be able to play the standard scenarios straight out of the box and never have to worry about the SC2 Editor. But it's going to be there regardless. For those who want it.

Hey Bill,

I'm not critizising the editor, in fact I believe it to probably be one of the best features of SC 2. My point is that we should work hard to get the standard scenarios right. This have always been my point, if we can make things right from the beginning let's do so.

What annoys me is that everytime I suggest a change to leaderfile or something else some goofy charachter shows up to tell me not to bother and just use editor to change this. That is a arguementation-technique used to dominate people and minimize their problem. That ain't constructive and fair play.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Hubert Cater:

Yes, I actually think Kuni has a strong point here. Let's face it, the campaigns will undoubtedly be perfect and absolutely satisfy everyone's idea of what should and should not be in them so no real need for an editor at all.

On the flip-side though, for those who *might* actually disagree with any of the design decisions, that will be very unlikely (read above arguments), and for those who might actually want to tinker with the game and create new scenarios/campaigns... well you guys will be out of luck

Hey Hubert you for or against my arguement? :confused: I'd never said anything against the editor, on the contrary I think it's a must have. But what we do need is to get the standard scenarios as good as possible in terms of balancing and historical accuaracy because of the points I've posted above.

Every time I post an idea or someone else does we hear from other members of this board that the editor will take care of that. But that's not the point here.

[ May 16, 2005, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

[Hubert Cater]

I'm not so sure Kuni, sounded like you were anti-editor... after all, what was the name of this thread, oh yes, the "anti-editor" thread

How about this as a compromise... I'll leave the editor in there but I'll leave a note with Matt to make sure the version you purchase will be a special version minus the editor. What does everyone think?

Ok, in all seriousness (as I was just having some fun with my above response), WE (read myself and the beta team) are of course trying to ensure that the game plays well and that the campaigns are well balanced... BUT with complete honesty and since we are speaking of fairness, is it completely reasonable/fair to assume that we will design campaigns that perfectly satisfy everyone's idea of the perfect set of WWII European Theater campaigns?

I will be the first to admit that I am not perfect so any reasonable response must be that there will always be those who disagree with a certain design decision, or disagree with the commanders list or disagree with whatever, and in that respect we offer the Editor.

Now, it is not to downplay your ideas or anyone else's ideas for the game, it is just a fact of life that some ideas just might not be included and/or we also reserve the right to disagree with you as well

What I believe is this, we will do as good a job as possible wrt the campaigns, and whenever someone mentions the use of the Editor, think of it as simply a way of saying, don't sweat it, in the worst case you will have the chance to edit it yourself. After all is this not a MUCH better compromise/set of options than what was available for SC1? We think so.

[J P Wagner]

Originally posted by Kuniworth:

Maybe, if you edit your mood to be more gay(gay=happy).

Well, I'll be dammed!...I do not know how you found out, but I was indeed gay (aka happy) at 6:56 am when you edited and thus softened your post....let gayness (aka happiness) reign supreme!...

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by J P Wagner:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Kuniworth:

Maybe, if you edit your mood to be more gay(gay=happy).

Well, I'll be dammed!...I do not know how you found out, but I was indeed gay (aka happy) at 6:56 am when you edited and thus softened your post....let gayness (aka happiness) reign supreme!... </font>

[Sombra]

Originally posted by pzgndr:

Playtesting and balancing the standard scenarios for competitive play is a goal, no doubt about that. But tell me, where is THE competition scenario mod that EVERYONE uses for SC1 league competition?? No bids, no tweaks, no nothing -- just the plain vanilla scenario. It's not out there. Why? Because everyone has different tastes, different abilities that need to be handicapped, etc. So you need a decent Editor.

And then there are the solo gamers looking for a challenge from the AI. You don't have that either except for a mod, and even then the AI has its limits. So you need a decent Editor.

And then there are those players who want to create their very own game. New map, new units, new everything. So again, you need a decent Editor.

The good news is that players should be able to play the standard scenarios straight out of the box and never have to worry about the SC2 Editor. But it's going to be there regardless. For those who want it.

I think that people like to stick to the original and offical scenarios. It is a usal behavior of the customer to believe that the designers know what they are doing

[vveedd]

Kuniworth you have my vote. Finally someone on this forum who has same thoughts like me. I have been saying that all the time. Editor will be great, I am sure, but I’ll use it only to correct original scenarios if they will need corrections. Beside that reason I have no interest for editor or for some home made scenarios.

[Redmow]

I like the idea of the editor but I also agree that the standard scenarios should not have to be edited.

I plan on taking an old AH game called Blitzkrieg and make it into an SCII game. I hope that it will work. We shall see.

[SeaMonkey]

HaH! Redmow, I remember that game...reds against the blues, separated by a few neutrals. Of course the editor will be able to handle it, might require some abstract thought on your part and the competitors, but never the less, doable. Are you planning to add the naval aspects, or a faithful adaptation without?

[JerseyJohn]

Blitzkreig was one of the most popular games for variants and non-Avalon Hill expansion kits. Ah yes, The Great (Sandy) Koufax Desert!