[Feedback] Demigod Visibility

On a similar note, its hard to instantly tell whether demigods and creeps are allied or enemy.

Demigods are the size they are for gameplay reasons. Regulus small size is one of his advantages, just like Rooks big size is one his disadvantages. All the other demigods are easily visible, and if you still have problems, check your minimap. Basic grunts are easy to tell apart (with the exception of the Priests) because they have radically different textures. Maybe you're playing it too far zoomed out?

I would also be very happy if there was a hotkey mapped for Demigod selection. When you play a general it could be quite handy... Regarding the size of Demigods I think it's okay. You already have the small circle to recognize a "small" Demigod and as DatonKallandor says, Demigod's small size can be an advantage. 

Rekka, as an occasional workaround, using the hotkey for minion selection, on a minion type you do not currently have seems to select the demigod. And I agree, a "select/focus on own demigod" button would be great.

I said the same thing in a post of my own.  Someone responded that I should use the minimap but I think that's entirely inadequate.  The minimap is too imprecise to be a good solution.  There needs to be some kind of color coding or something to make it easier to distinguish between opposing factions.

I said the same thing in a post of my own.  Someone responded that I should use the minimap but I think that's entirely inadequate.  The minimap is too imprecise to be a good solution.  There needs to be some kind of color coding or something to make it easier to distinguish between opposing factions.

Color coding would be great .  It is almost impossible to target the vampire in the middle of the creeps same with some of the other Demigods

I'm pretty sure hitting ESC will select your demigod. I'd also like to be able to target my Demigod (say, with the shield ability) by clicking on the picture in the middle of the HUD.

Completely agree.  Demigod feels rather like a war of tiny insects with Demigods being rather larger insects than the rest.  Only really big heroes like Oak and The Rook truly stand out.  I feel like GPG needs to work on what Blizzard likes to talk a lot about with their games - distinct unit silhouettes.  Every unit should be clearly visible and it shouldn't be hard to tell different units apart.  It should also be very very easy to tell Demigods apart from regular units, and from each other.

I don't expect this game to have WC3 proportions, because they were quite large, but something in between WC3 proportions and the current ones would be nice. 

I don't expect it to happen, though.  I understand this game is from the developers of SupCom and that that game was a similar Ant War.  It perplexes me why a developer would choose to make a game in this fashion, since it seems to me like they spend a lot of time trying to make these cool, highly detailed units only to have the vast majority of the detail lost on the player because everything happens to be really tiny unless you're zoomed way way in to a miopic level (in which case you can't play very effectively).

Making everything big and easily recognizeable ruins any sense of scale. The fact that most things are the size they are makes the size of the rook far more impressive. It's the reason the X-units in Supcom were so impressive - the regular units were incredibly tiny next to them.

Compare that to Blizzards games, and their "huge" Starcraft Battlecruisers being barely larger than a tank, or their Warcraft 3 endgame units being barely bigger than every other unit. They don't look impressive at all.

Yes, Daton, maybe that's true.

But guess which game is more competitive and popular: SupCom or Starcraft?

I hope the answer is obvious to you.

Guess which game is more interesting? Yeah, SupCom.

Competitive does not equal quality or popular.

Interesting is subjective.  Popular, however, is not.  Starcraft is FAR more popular than SupCom (and is much older).  Also, on the contrary, competitive does equal popularity, at least in terms of online play.  There are a lot of strategy games that are very popular amongst the single player crowd.  But only competitive strategy games have any kind of significant following or longevity in online multiplayer gameplay.  Furthermore, only very competitive games are played at events like the World Cyber Games.  If a game isn't competitive enough to be at the World Cyber Games, then it will have a much harder time maintaining a serious following.

As for the "fun and interesting" versus "competitive" debate, I've had this discussion before with people.

The developers have stated, quite clearly and quite often, that their intention with this game is for it to be a competitive game.  The term "tournament staple" was even used a couple times, if I recall.

My point is simply that with the current scaling, this game will not be nearly at the level of competition for it to be considered anywhere near on par with a game like Starcraft.  Maybe you think it's more interesting with tiny units on a massive scale, watching the battle unfold from afar.  But that hurts the player's ability to distinguish themselves through skill, particularly micro skill.  Since this game doesn't have you managing resources or controlling a lot of units at once (even as a General) macro skill will not come into the picture to a very large extent.  Therefore, in order for it to be adequately competitive, micro has to play a very significant role. 

Strategy obviously needs to come into play as well, but strategy can be easily learned over time by almost anybody.  That creates an increasingly even playing field in the long run.  Micro has to be practiced in order to be developed and maintained, and some people are simply better at it than others.  This allows the best, most dedicated players to distinguish themselves, meaning the playing field will become increasingly less even between average players and great players.  This is what is necessary for the game to be competitive.

I'm not asking for Warcraft 3 level proportions.  Units are huge in that game because there tend to be very few in use at one time.  However, I think making the units more on a size level of Starcraft would be good.  Minotaurs = Zealots and scale from there.  Demigods ought to be at least as large proportionally as a Battlecruiser or a small building.  This keeps their "epic" quality.

If you think strategy can be learned by everyone and games should be decided by reflexes you're in the wrong genre. FPS is down the hall.

Micro and reflexes are two completely different things.

You obviously don't understand competitive RTS play if you think micro is about reflexes and strategy is all that matters.

Daton, you are just arguing because you are afraid to change the status quo.  Sense of scale is overrated and it could be easily justified by saying that they are demigod's they are bigger than everyone else.  If you make regulas and the vampire 10% bigger you can also make the rook 10% bigger.  Another alternative would be large pillars of light coming out of each demigod in their team's color, so your eyes are directed to them.

Poor demigod visibility is not a game feature, it is a design flaw.  This game seems to be doing a good job of dropping DotA's weak design issues.  It would be a real pity if newly introduced design issues counter-acted that.  Demigod visibility is a huge issue.  The lesser units can be trickier to discern what they are in a glance.  You should be able to spot the all the demigods on your screen within a second.  If they decide to keep this I'm afraid it would be difficult to take the game seriously as a competitive game and it would mostly be a passing fad.  I would have to consider DotA a superior competitive game because it focuses more on the decisions the players make rather than spotting units, and just to note I consider DotA allstars to be designed by idiots.

If you want hiding to be a factor, you simply give the "hiding" heroes a greater line of sight so they can hide in the fog of war.  That way they can hover just outside the other heroes LoS in the fog.

Coming from someone who wants to keep the old comic proportions of RTS that's a little hypocritical, don't you think?

Yes, in the old "competetive" RTSes Strategy takes a backseat - that does not mean that's the way it should be. Micro is an artifact of the birth of RTS, not something that was intentional.

Supcom is not as competitive because it doesn't have a big fanbase: because GPG doesn't have enough money to advertise it enough(or THQ). GPG unlike Blizzard isn't a bigname developer. There are some design flawes in Supcom, but you have to remeber SC had these too. Supcom  has alot more potential to become a deeper game, but it doesn't get updated coz they don't get money from it(while Blizzard does; SC II and prestice for other games).

SC didn't florish because it was a good game, it florished because it was a decent game and it got polished because updating made money for blizzard.

Those proportions serve a very good purpose, unit identification.  I can play Starcraft and spot most units in seconds, I can play DoW and spot the heroes in seconds (and the big units are still much larger than them.)  I can play warcraft 3 or DotA and instantly recognize the heroes.  These weren't trained skills, they were something a newbie could instantly see.  It is just good design.

The sense of scale you offer is something players will very easily dismiss once they begin playing the game and can be extremely easily justified by saying "they are demigods, they are big."

Good visual communication is a huge issue in games and demigod is lacking in this department right now.  Most of this is due to the demigods being so small.

All the games you listed have a far smaller scope than Demigod. Not to mention Heroes in DoW were as big as all other units, not more-so. Especially Eldar heroes could get easily lost in a skirmish. The thing that made DoW's heroes be still visible was their radically different (and user-controlled) colour schemes.

Age of Empires 3 has been played at WCG, yet it is not a game with a very large fan base.  I highly doubt Ensemble Studios had more money to throw around than GPG, even if it was backed by Microsoft.  After all, Ensemble Studios is shutting down after the release of Halo Wars.

Look at a game like DoW, however, which is a lot more popular than Age of Empires 3.  It has not been played at WCG and likely will never be because the game design downplays micro skill and resource management.

So your argument that money / popularity = competitive support is weak.  I will admit, however, that having funding certainly does help for marketing a game and developing a playerbase, which in turn helps to maintain the game as a competitive staple.  It is not, however, entirely necessary.

P.S. Let's be honest, Starcraft is not just a "decent" game.  Perhaps it isn't your preferred style of RTS, but it is one of the greatest RTS ever.  Yes, perhaps that is just my subjective opinion.  But I believe you'll find it's one held by the majority of non-ultracasual RTS players.

Smaller scope? What have you been smoking -_0 In demigod you can control MAYBE 20 units. In starcraft, Supcom or any other rts you can control upwards of 100.

And mobs controlled by the AI don't count :p

Actually, DoW was played in the WCG for at least one year.  The problem was they completely dropped the balance ball at one point and never got it back.  The game was never in the WCG since.

Seriously, are you trying to play WCG as the ultimate indicator for what is balanced and skill based? They had CnC3 in their lineup before the game was released. And you can read up how that one turned out. WCG is based on which publisher flings around more money, that's been proven repeatedly by their line up.

Are you seriously trying to claim Microsoft has less marketing money than THQ? That's just a little off.

Why wouldn't they? There's many large scale FPS games, yet you only control one squad in those at the most. Scale isn't determined by player controlled characters - it's dependant on the entirety of the game.

I think you're confusing *scale* and *scope*. Halo, Diablo or Warcraft had great scale. You were a small part of a massive, living world. Starcraft, Supcom or the Total War games had scope. You're a general leading a massive force to victory through superior strategy. Demigod's scope would be, uh, nil. It's scale is awesome though.