Starcraft 2 - Supply Max?

[blu]

yea I'd say keep it 200

[-Azrael666-]

Well, an actually serious problem that could come up is the fact they may be adding a ton of new units. I don't want to be limited to not being able to make all the new units because they left it at 200. If worse comes to worse, I think the lowest they should make it is 300, maybe even 250, but they need to add something because it's pretty obvious there will be at least a few new unit types, and some of which I assume to be more powerful, meaning they'll require more supply per unit.

[₪Zeratul₪]

300+ pop = greater computer

greater computer = more of dad's money

[-Azrael666-]

They should just make SC2 so awesome that no one's computer is good enough to play it. Then there won't be any complaints about the game itself

[Darkmatter]

Originally Posted by ₪Zeratul₪

300+ pop = greater computer

greater computer = more of dad's money

But greater computer also increases the probability of increased grahpics, use of 3D Models, more in-game action that requires a better processor, etc. I would rather buy Sc2 and upgrade my current computer to actually play it then play it with no upgrading and have it totally blow.

[zerg_slayer(IC)]

MY idea is that they should let u set u own supply max from

100-500 normal games (eg:FFA,Comp Stomp,2V2,3V3...)
100-700 Use Map Settings

or something like that :tnt

[AZN_FLEA]

there will be too much lag and disconnection shit

[KING OF ZEALOTS]

well well hmmm... of course this is the most ****ed up idea I've ever had but how great would the battles be if there was like 1000 supply and there were 1000 supply worth of hydras on one side of a river and 1000 supply worth of Ghosts on the other DAMN THAT WOULD BE SOOOO AWSOME TO WATCH especially if u were like zoomed in looking in like 1st person mode GODDAMN!

[xaax_fenris_brood]

well then what will sc 2 all unit limits 28000

[Kaison]

Be cool if its more than 300, But then 56k people will lag ... Oh well

[TheoStormhawk]

Originally Posted by Lwek

What do you think the Supply max for Starcraft 2 would be?

I would like it to be atleast 200 but have it customizable for custom maps. (Example: Can change the supply max to 400 for a UMS map)
Remember - 'Most' computers will have a good enough graphic card to handle large scale battles in a few years.
Starcraft2, Starcraft 2, SC2, SCII, SC II

Yeah man, good thread, I think the deciding factor will be the gameplay type because if there are going to be units like the heroes in wc3, the supply will be low.

[DeathClaw]

i said three hundred on an instict but i think im regretting my choice

my first thought was well it should be three hundred but the units should cost more and be over all stronger

now i think it should stay two hundred (or even go lower) because that would restrict the use of money maps and some other noobish things...and SCUMS arent a problem because theres a scums limit...a max number of units the game can hold...or there can be a trigger for that

but with a lower supply the units would either have to be stronger or something so....
let the game creators figure this one out

[TheoStormhawk]

Originally Posted by DeathClaw

i said three hundred on an instict but i think im regretting my choice

my first thought was well it should be three hundred but the units should cost more and be over all stronger

now i think it should stay two hundred (or even go lower) because that would restrict the use of money maps and some other noobish things...and SCUMS arent a problem because theres a scums limit...a max number of units the game can hold...or there can be a trigger for that

but with a lower supply the units would either have to be stronger or something so....
let the game creators figure this one out

yeah, also if some units like the heroes in wc3 will appear, we won't be able to control 300 units and heroes. Imagine 12 battles focusing on a hero.
This is why wc3 has only 100.
but u are right, let the blizzard guys to figure it out

[SouLess]

Chances are, if they use an engine close to the WC one, it'll be around 150 max.

Just you know, to be safe for the barebones computers that are running on 56kAOL

[Laharl]

I use a comp with a 56k connection and I almost never lag on starcraft even when the "Cannot Create More Units" error pops up.

Hell, I know people on DSL/cable/etc that lag more than me. So don't feed me that.

Also, my comp itself is soon to be higher end.

[Bret]

I think he's talking more about AOL than 56k. 56k is still decent and worked fine for me and worked extra fine for my friend across the street. But AOL, its crap. Its terrible trying to play games on it.

[TheoStormhawk]

Originally Posted by iMike

Chances are, if they use an engine close to the WC one, it'll be around 150 max.

Just you know, to be safe for the barebones computers that are running on 56kAOL

The wc3 game doesn't need to have a high speed internet connection, just to be stable at a certain wavelength. It has a smart engine that uses internet connection just to process it's action and battle algorithm.

[Darktekmaster]

i think about 250(or) no limit but for 1 reason i say 250.. is becus its more of a complex game with graphics probably and also think of the lag of u got boocoo zerglings n stuff... but i say no limit because no limit definantly wuld change the tides of the game..... 200 fully uped hydras against same thing... will result in 1 hydra from 1 team with like no health prolly....but if u kno how to micro ur units ull over come him

[Shaggy.2Dope]

I am back, kingofzealots... hmm i think that before a creator creates a game, there should be a bar, one that has like a minimum supply of 100 all the way up to unlimited, and if u start a game on unlimited it should say, WARNING!!! PLAYING ON HIGH SUPPLY WILL GENERATE EXCESSIVE LAG IN GAMEPLAY, PLEASE PRESS CONTINUE, OR GO BACK. same with a quickmatch, just use teh fkin bar.