Staredit Network > Forums > SC2 Custom Maps > Topic: Temple Siege 2
Temple Siege 2
Sep 21 2010, 12:59 am
By: UnholyUrine
Pages: 1 2 322 >
 

Sep 21 2010, 12:59 am UnholyUrine Post #1



Hi Folks,

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Starcraft 2 is upon us, and while there're already games that're like Dota (for people that don't know, look up "SOTIS"), I think it is time we start building up ideas for Temple Siege 2 on Starcraft 2.

Straight to the point. What I want to hear or discuss with you guys are your ideas on using the Galaxy Editor's ability to improve Temple Siege 2. Yes, you can discuss about new hero ideas and what of the old hero, but nothing can be for sure. Rather, I'd like to hear more about Gameplay Improvements and how to incorporate the UI System. I'd also like to hear whatever grandeur theories and ideas that'd completely change the game and make it a lot better. Any problems you think that should be remedied in SC2, please point them out.

Also, please refrain from knocking down other's idea without a good reason. This is only a discussion/theory thread, and I'm here to listen to your ideas.

That being said, it is your turn to show me what ideas you have, things that bothers you, things that you think will make the game better, and who knows... maybe it'll be incorporated.
(credits will be given where it is deserved) =D


Here's a list of things in question (out of many)
  • Spell System (traditional or new?)
  • UI Interface
  • Spell Damage Upgrades (b4, wpn upgrades = spell upgrades. What now?)
  • Items???
  • # of Players (3v3? 4v4? 5v5?)
  • Spawn System (minerals to build hero spawns?)
  • 3D Models... if we do, who's going to do them?
  • Gameplay Mechanics... what new and cool spell effects can you think of?
  • More problems/questions?


Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 21 2010, 1:13 am by UnholyUrine.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 1:05 am OlimarandLouie Post #2



Firstly, I think we should actually give the heroes names, like LoL does, instead of boring predictable stuff like "Medic" and "Silencer".

Secondly, I think we should implement a game mode where there would be 4 opposing bases with 3 heroes each base (1 per lane, so to say).
It would look like this.


I believe turrets should be deny-able, and heroes should not be. Minions are another matter entirely which I would personally prefer them to *not* be deny-able, but that is debatable.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 21 2010, 1:47 am by OlimarandLouie.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 1:12 am NinjaOtis Post #3



Keep all old hero's, but also have new variations of hero's. You know like a mech that can transform into a freakin hellion!? (As a variation form)
Old Post:

Keep traditional spell system
5v5 at most
Don't tell me making an original TS on sc2 is boring, it would still be badass
Should still have spawns, items sound pretty cool, just don't create too many... (all the items from SOTIS are really confusing if you're a newb)
Don't get too creative until you have a solid foundation
Don't give input if you aren't a TS'er

It'd be intersting if you could buy different assiming units, like a scv can do different things than a probe or a drone.
Improving gameplay in general:
-Don't make map too huge so it doesn't lag when people spam spells
-Game needs to emphasize strategy and teamwork over just one unit getting OP and superman'ing the game.

New Post:

-Alright, terrain from TS 7 is too cluttered, it's too dark too, personally I find maps with light more appealing than dark maps, that way something like Day/Night will seem more realistic due to a larger contrast.

-The simpler the better, for the first versions, keep items to a limit as i already said.

-Also keep spells to a limit, for the upgrading spells system, I'm not sure if directly upping from the unit is a good thing or bad, because in SC TS, you could see them up with civs and go "Oh shit he has l3! Watchout team."

Post has been edited 5 time(s), last time on Sep 22 2010, 2:17 am by Vortex-.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 1:19 am Aristocrat Post #4



Make "input spells" using detection for a buffer of keypresses.

e.g.
Z = L1
←/↑/→/↓ + Z = L2
→↓↘ + Z = SHORYUKENL3
↓↘→↗↑↖←↙↓↘→↗↑ + Z = L4

Of course, an exact copy of Temple Siege would be boring. I'm sure we can add in a lot of variations based on this: something like the buffer system found in fighting games to unleash different specials. While this was not optimal for SC1, we can certainly do it in SC2 without massive spell delay.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 1:23 am Alzarath Post #5

Praetor

Quote
Spell System (traditional or new?)
Command-card based. It'd be pointless not to.

Quote
UI Interface
Probably make it as un-cluttered as possible. So maybe a small menu system for purchasing a probe and whatever else would be up for purchase.

Quote
Spell Damage Upgrades (b4, wpn upgrades = spell upgrades. What now?)
You can make upgrades improve spells directly.

Quote
Items???
Probably same system as before, but more items.

Quote
# of Players (3v3? 4v4? 5v5?)
I say 5v5 or 6v6

Quote
3D Models... if we do, who's going to do them?
Probably shouldn't. I doubt anyone can make Blizzard-quality models.

EDIT: Oh crap, I've been thinking Heroes Sanctuary. I'd much rather see that re-made. I don't quite remember TS, I didn't play it too much, but I'm sure my replies still work.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 3:31 am UnholyUrine Post #6



*sigh*





None.

Sep 21 2010, 12:05 pm Aristocrat Post #7



You'll probably be better off remaking Alpha Marines, UU. It'll be more well-received than TS.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 12:40 pm Dungeon-Master Post #8



The most important thing for me is : Don't make it like sotis (dota), in which I mean one overfed charactercan easily win the game, it pisses me off. Make the heroes disapear after the player left, this also is uninteresting, since nobody uses two heroes at a time.

The terrain, IMO, must still be uneven. I mean by this that the linear "three lines with a river in the middle one being the only terran variation" thing sucks, nothign is interesting here, no advantage at all.

As vortex said, don't make the game an item fest, only one or two items "suggested" per hero is fine, plus a few items useful for anyone. Anytning more will make it too hard for the noobs.

NO shitlist, it sucks to be paired with newbs, but it sucks even more to try learning how to play, lose the game and be shitlisted and unable to play this kind of game for the reamining of your life.

Definately use the command card for spells, possibly recovery items too.

New heroes might be cool, but keep the old ones, only revamped. It also would be a good idea to think about the unit size, bigger heroes does look better since the creeps should not be too hard to kill, but at the same time it does look a bit cheezy.

That's all i could think of right now... I was not a dedicated TS player but i did enjoy a few games once in a while.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 2:11 pm Biophysicist Post #9



I'd rather have something pretty similar to original TS, only with more stuff, as opposed to your current idea of "three spells + each individually upgraded". I re-propose what I said before (or think I said... memory's getting fuzzy): Four spells per hero, plus a fifth that is selected from a hero-specific pool. eg. Assassin would have Escape, Crippling Strike, Enemy Intimidation, and Decapitation, plus one of the following: Shadowstrike (Blink and damage), Image (Hallucination) or Aether Walk (move to another dimension temporarily). The fifth spell would probably be available for purchase immediately, but cost the same to unlock as the l2.

Quote
As vortex said, don't make the game an item fest, only one or two items "suggested" per hero is fine, plus a few items useful for anyone. Anytning more will make it too hard for the noobs.
Seconded.

Also, rather than the TS1 assim system, why not let each hero assim directly (without the need for a Probe) after an upgrade is researched, and have multiple types of assims instead of just one (as was already suggested)? (The assim up would also let you get cannons and pylons and any spawn structures, if we decide to add those.)

Disregard what I say, if you want: I'll still be your data editor slave either way. ;P

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 21 2010, 4:05 pm by Biophysicist.



None.

Sep 21 2010, 8:33 pm ClansAreForGays Post #10



I'd keep everything super simple. I wouldn't give players tons of new options. Same amount of heroes too. Basically make it easier for people to pick up than dota or w/e aos people are starting.




Sep 21 2010, 10:48 pm Jack Post #11

>be faceless void >mfw I have no face

Quote
The terrain, IMO, must still be uneven. I mean by this that the linear "three lines with a river in the middle one being the only terran variation" thing sucks, nothign is interesting here, no advantage at all.
It will definitely be this uneven, have you actually played the original TS?

As for items, currently if we have items, there won't be many of them and you won't be able to combine them like in dota/sotis/hon/lol/1000otherAoS's.

We're currently undecided as to how the spell system will work, play testing will show whether our new idea will be viable or not. If not, we'll go back to the classic system.

UI will be custom, so there won't be a command card most likely. Spells will be obvious and easy to use though, no worries there.

Hero size will be increased, possibly creep size too, although creeps will generally be smaller than the heroes.



Red classic.

"In short, their absurdities are so extreme that it is painful even to quote them."

Sep 22 2010, 2:12 am xYoshix Post #12



I'd like a classic remake of the original temple siege. Start off small, see the reaction then build off from there.



None.

Sep 22 2010, 2:55 am NinjaOtis Post #13



Quote from xYoshix
I'd like a classic remake of the original temple siege. Start off small, see the reaction then build off from there.

TY yes.



None.

Sep 24 2010, 4:10 pm UnholyUrine Post #14



You can't expect it to be a complete replica of the old one.. Please don't be so narrow-minded, people.



None.

Sep 24 2010, 6:38 pm rockz Post #15

ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!

Quote from UnholyUrine
You can't expect it to be a complete replica of the old one.. Please don't be so narrow-minded, people.
Why not? Obviously it won't be a complete replica, as I'm sure there's better ways to achieve stunning, vacuum effects, curses, thousands of zerglings popping up, arrows hailing down from the sky, a sudden swarm of blades trapping opponents, targeted explosions, a swell foop attack, etc...

If you're going to call it temple siege 2, then you have to base it on temple siege 1.



"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"

Sep 24 2010, 7:45 pm UnholyUrine Post #16



Yes, of course I'll base it on TS1... All the old heroes will definately be back.. Some very similar, some changed, and some improved in big ways.

What I'm trying to get at is that all of you are worried that TS2 will be totally different...
Okay, so it's going to be a lil diff.

But what I want to know is HOW you all want it to be different. We can't have the exact same game. We're not going to create 15 dark templars around a zealot when he casts his L2... (probly not..).. so do we keep the spell effects the same and somehow make a cool effect for it.. Or incorporate another spell that was impossible in SC1 to trigger that has similar/brand new functions..

I've already reworked Volt a bit :D.. but We're having a hard time deciding on the Spell System.
It'd be a shame if it is completely the same as before... without incorporating any new spells. So, guys, throw the idea that "spells will be completely the same" out the window.. and help me brainstorm a plan.

oh.. and.. I understand.. i'll keep it simple.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 24 2010, 7:55 pm by UnholyUrine.



None.

Sep 24 2010, 8:08 pm rockz Post #17

ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!

yes, but I rather like the idea of keeping the spell EFFECTS the same. How you go about doing so is completely different. I don't know the limitations of the SC2 editor, so I can't guarantee it, but I can think of a few things which will change the method, but keep the same effect:

As an example:
Warrior
L1 - identical, or make it passive.
L2 - Instead of making dts, make an effect of swords which splash an area and slows the target, as well as dealing a DOT.
L3 - Would be pretty cool to actually make it a charge, so that he charges towards each unit, stunning them, and instantly killing any normal unit in the area. I actually wouldn't mind seeing this one chained, so that if he hits one unit and another unit is within the charge range who isn't currently stunned, he will continue on to each unit until no more exist. This could cause infinite loops if all 3 heroes are close enough to each other and the stun duration isn't enough, so perhaps a 1 stun per cast limit? The possibilities are as far as the editor takes it.
L4 - identical or passive.

Volt
L1 - actually make a shockwave, as in HoN's corrupted disciple
L2 - add some effects which show which units are affected by the draw.
L3 - Pretty basic area stun, right?
L4 - we can change graphics to make him huge.

It wouldn't be boring at all.



"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"

Sep 25 2010, 3:13 am ShredderIV Post #18



Yeah, I agree on making the spells maybe play similar roles, but not be the same old effects.

I think it would be a good idea to keep the same upgrade style. either in upgrades, or spell upgrades or mana, or w/e. I also am finding myself slightly opposed to adding items, just because i ask myself, what's the point? I mean, maybe adding in special effects to attacks, and maybe MS bonuses or w/e, but I think part of the reason TS was so good was the differences in MSs and such that balanced the game and made it a lot more entertaining. Having a Lm that can move as fast as a mutant would just suck. Also, how would gold for items be obtained? Through last hits? we already get exp and upgrades form that. Adding gold might add a bigger snowball effect for a team getting all the farm.

Also, are we considering taking more the dota style of play and having a shitton of heroes, or the old school Ts play where there arent as many heroes? Also, is it gonna stay 3v3? or might it change to 4v4 or 5v5? I'd personally say it depends on how many heroes you plan to add. Like, if there are 60 heroes, you dont want to keep it 3v3, because then there are way too many possibilities of strategy combinations, and a lower chance of countering certain strategies.

Going along with Rockz, an example of how my favorite hero, LM could be used with the same exact spells (this is assuming from the old versions where dragoons was lvl 3 and lvl 4 was still reavers).

L1- like sentry's shield but bigger, can move, random unit in shield damaged (or just make his attack speed higher and let him target)
L2- Use HSMs that target units based on threat, like the reavers did.
L3- Create a wall around him, AOE DOT maybe?
L4- just more of L2...

Light mage would actually be one of the weirdest/hardest to port and keep to the original (without doing the old "units spawn" thing. Notable others might be mutant, archer, mech, phantom, and spec ops/engineer, IMO.

Either way, TS definitely needs a place in SC2 mapmaking. It'll blow all those crappy dota clones outta the water.
Quote
Firstly, I think we should actually give the heroes names, like LoL does, instead of boring predictable stuff like "Medic" and "Silencer".

Secondly, I think we should implement a game mode where there would be 4 opposing bases with 3 heroes each base (1 per lane, so to say).
It would look like this.

I believe turrets should be deny-able, and heroes should not be. Minions are another matter entirely which I would personally prefer them to *not* be deny-able, but that is debatable.
1. I disagree. It is much more beginner friendly, and actually adds character to their name more than a name like Boogaboo does. What does Boogaboo do just by looking at his name? You have no idea. Now if Boogaboo's name was Pulverizer, it's a lot easier to tell what he's probably gonna do in battle.

2. Also no. Not only would having 12 players in a single match be a strategical and balancing nightmare, but two teams is much more enjoyable than multiple teams. The reasoning being that two teams could easily push another team into submission to get them out of the game early, especially if they have late-game heroes. In a 2v2, this would be a little harder, as that late game team only has to defend against a team their own size instead of effectively a team twice their size.

3. I think we should keep minions the way they were in the first TS, along with the base system and such. Make minions a little stronger, but not to the level of dota and such. TS is great because it has so much hero interaction, and the beginning of games isnt always farming like it is in dota. Also, I say stick to the old style exp system.


You have my Testing and bug-finding sword, Unholy.

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Sep 25 2010, 3:29 am by ShredderIV.



None.

Sep 25 2010, 3:51 am UnholyUrine Post #19



The sword glows with power. I feel it throbbing in my hand.
... sick.

Yes, these were the ideas I was looking forward to discuss with.

Agreed with ShredderIV against Olimar (Srry Olimar)
Disagree in some part about the spells.

Technically, I'm thinking of making the game 4v4. 3 lanes, middle lane x2 the amount of spawn.
Not to worry, I will keep the feel of spawn/farming/ganking relatively the same. Apparently I have hit a sweet spot.. I'm not going to give that up for more stuff.

As for the hardest question to ask would be the Spell System, aka how would the spell upgrades...
I am going to go against you all by saying I don't plan to have the same, simple, 4 spell linear progression system. But I will have something similar (hopefully).
Reason is because I feel that all of the Heroes can be expanded on. They need to evolve, however so little.
Heroes like the Summoner is a good example. Now, we can make the summons weaker when away from the summy, it's easy to make other summonable units work and balanced. Other afflictions and stuff can be implemented. and etc.
Another example is like the Warrior. I feel that it can be expanded to be more like a Paladin type, with minimal healing properties. We can also give dark mage more summons... or give mutant/mech more forms... Make Volt have positive and negative magnetic properties (oops.. i spilled it).. basically making each hero even more unique as it is.
Other heroes, less likely to get a face lift would be heroes like LM or Assassin, as you've said.. This is why I'm still finding hard to do a solid spell system without compromising what was good (w/e it is) before. I think that it is possible.

EDIT: As for spell effects. Yes, I will be taking advantage of the unit movement and all that jazz.. It'd be fun to see heroes bouncing around
I'm planning to stay away from percentages and evasion... I'm also going to go against upgrading agility, unless it's an item.. which would be another topic...

Oh yes.. another thing.. "Denying" or "Denial" .. I can't deny the fact that I think it is absurd... and don't plan to let players attack their own spawn in anyway, unless splash, but even then, would not give exp. I watched my friend play HoN .. The amount of "Denying" that was going on made the game a lil boring, as it limited ganking... and based things on farming...

Last thing to mention would be new heroes.. Yes, Of COURSE there will be new heroes.. I wouldn't forgive myself If I didn't put any.. there were a lot of ideas that I wanted to implement, but couldn't because of Sc1 limitations. But don't wry... I won't be adding too much. (maybe ~100.. j/k)

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 25 2010, 4:05 am by UnholyUrine.



None.

Sep 25 2010, 6:53 am Azrael Post #20



New hero: A guy with powers that relate to time manipulation :awesome:

You should have some terrain altering effects too.




Options
Pages: 1 2 322 >
  Back to forum
Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
Members in this topic: None.
[03:59 am]
Ultraviolet -- :wob:
[2024-6-19. : 6:26 pm]
Ultraviolet -- :wob:
[2024-6-18. : 8:38 am]
Zycorax -- :wob:
[2024-6-18. : 3:14 am]
O)FaRTy1billion[MM] -- :wob:
[2024-6-15. : 11:09 pm]
Ultraviolet -- :wob:
[2024-6-12. : 6:23 am]
Ultraviolet -- got some light recalls behind too
[2024-6-12. : 12:07 am]
O)FaRTy1billion[MM] -- 🦗
[2024-6-11. : 9:53 pm]
Wing Zero -- I wonder how he knew I was in the market for a good cricket bat
[2024-6-11. : 2:27 pm]
lil-Inferno -- ya
[2024-6-11. : 10:49 am]
Oh_Man -- or scarab maybeh
Please log in to shout.


Members Online: jun3hong