WarCraft III: When Men Were Men, Orcs Were Orcs, and Customs Were Fun

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Retro Games > WarCraft III: When Men Were Men, Orcs Were Orcs, and Customs Were Fun

«‹›92 »

Eregos: Aug 17, 2006; A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?

Saw someone mention the remakes of the Warcraft III campaigns with current unit balance patch data. Here they are: http://tiny.cc/jym1sx

And the forum where Pie_Patel talks about them is here. It took a significant amount of googling to find them, I actually have some of the older ones and none of the obvious search terms led me to them. Afaik this link is the only place to download them at present. Someone might want to do him a favor and repost the campaigns on other sites. Make sure to get the newer pack that includes both scourge campaigns.

EDIT: Warning: The difficulty variable doesn't properly import between levels. So whenever you start a new mission, it will be 'normal' instead of 'hard'. Circumvented by returning to the campaign screen after each mission.

Eregos fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Dec 28, 2015

# ? Dec 28, 2015 20:45

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 03:00

Eregos: Aug 17, 2006; A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?

Having not read about how the Warcraft III ladder worked in a long time I found this really really interesting and well written. Apparently SA's BBcode doesn't feature options to show/hide text anymore and using subscript actually increases the size, by using larger line spacing. This was posted originally in 2009 or 2014.

Pie_Patel posted:

Depending on one�s opinion, Warcraft III was either an exceptional foray into role-playing strategy, a mini game on Defense of the Ancients, or a game that was horrible because your Starcraft build orders didn�t work in it. Most forget its undeniable legacy: An anonymous matchmaking system that became the standard for competitive online play.

Starcraft II will use a form of this matchmaking system. I�m merely concerned Starcraft II will use the variation that did significant damage to Warcraft III�s competitive community, instead of the one that fostered it.

The original Reign of Chaos matchmaking system had flaws. Bumbling idiots would consistently match top players, the latter having to play as many as twenty games to regain the experience lost in a single defeat. After some tweaks, the most effective Warcraft III matchmaking system was based on the following:

1) Everyone starts with zero experience points.
2) Your experience point total correlated to a ladder level of one to fifty.
3) The matchmaking system paired you with and against players within six levels of your own.
4) From levels one to nine, the experience penalty for a loss was reduced. At level ten and beyond, the player would receive the full penalty. Theoretically, any fifty-percent player should become level ten.
5) To prevent players from idling accounts at the top of the rankings, players above level ten could lose experience points if they did not play enough games each week.
6) If the player leaves a Random Team game, he would not receive credit for a team victory. This change prevented lossbots from getting to level five and six simply by leaving games.

The system had three disadvantages:

1) Smurfing (the process of playing under a new alias) was rather easy. Top players could play as many as fifty games without running into a difficult contest. Upon creating a new account, moving into your skill range could take some time.
2) Due to the mediocrity of Random Team players, the few skilled players (level seventeen-and-up in a matchmaking system where most gravitate to level ten) could have difficulty finding games.
3) With the onset of the full experience penalty at level ten, the majority of players would never see the range of levels from eleven to fifty. Levels one through ten did not adequately differentiate the skill levels of these players.

Though it had flaws, this system worked: Your ladder level and win percentage were relevant. A level twenty player was undoubtedly better than a fifteen, and a fifteen better than a ten. It was so good, that it became the proving ground for amateurs who believed they could take on the pros. In the same way that ICCUP is a proving ground for Starcraft players, anyone could get a shot at Grubby if they moved high up the ladder. That�s how an online ladder is supposed to work, and it definitely worked.

So naturally, low-level players complained. They decried a system where they had trouble attaining a .500 record, a system where smurfs threw them the occasional bitchslap. Rather than getting better at the game, Blizzard caved in to their demands and tweaked the matchmaking system.

1) In addition to your visible ladder level, the player received an Expected Ladder Level (ELL), a prediction by the matchmaking system as to what your ladder level will eventually be. ELL is the ladder level which the matchmaking system believes you will win fifty percent of your games at.
2) In the previous system, fifty-percent players would eventually become level ten. In the new system, �average� players would attain level twenty-eight. With enough skill, the player could move past level fifty (although this change had been made prior to this iteration of the matchmaking system).
3) Any player of any level can now match each other, as long as they share a similar ELL.
4) Win and loss streaks would be accounted for. Winning many games in a row would match you against high-level players in rapid succession. This was one of the safeguards designed to prevent smurfing.
5) In each gametype, a certain number of games played (as many as 200 in solo, and 300 in random team) would be required to make your ladder level equal to your ELL.

In theory, this is simply a modified ELO rating system where one plays a number of games to reveal their actual rating. The problem with this system was summarized by a Blizzard employee years back. When asked about this iteration of the matchmaking system, he stated ladder level was not important. If ladder level doesn�t mean anything, and all players in this system should end up with a fifty percent record, you can see what the problem is.

It would initially fall apart because Blizzard failed to sell the system. Warcraft III players were not thrilled with having to play hundreds of games simply to find out what their overall ranking was. It also neutered the accomplishment that came with winning on a game-to-game basis. As a result, people had no confidence in a system that requires confidence in the system, and many immediately stopped playing the game.

Afterwards, Blizzard refused to compensate for the exodus and didn�t tweak search times for high-level players. Ever. What became obnoxious for solo players (wait times in excess of fifteen minutes) became unbearable in Random Team, where high-level players can�t find games outside of peak hours. During this time, mediocre players fill out the top of the ladder rankings simply because they can find enough games to reach their ELL.

In the grandest of ironies, a system designed to stop smurfing was now forcing top-level players to smurf simply so they could find games. The other option involved high-level players intentionally losing in order to lower their ELL. As a result, high-level backstabbing wasn�t limited to �I loving hate you�, and introduced a mess of players sabotaging team efforts so they could play the drat computer game.

To cap the fiasco, though the formula for ELL calculation has never been made public, it became quickly obvious how to abuse it. Originally, players found they could deliberately tank their record in one game type in order to create easier matchups in another. This still does not prevent players from deliberately losing in order to reduce the difficulty of the games they play. Where it�s drat difficult for one to take a 10-0 record and go 75-15, it�s exceptionally easy for a player to go 0-10 and achieve the same results. And in a system where ladder level means little, why would one care how he achieved that 75-15 record?

The original matchmaking systems may have catered to elite players, but it was far superior to the ensuing clusterfuck. The most important trait of a good matchmaking system is to demonstrate that it has legitimacy. Players, good and bad, will be willing to play in a competitive ladder system if they feel the pointless number next to their name has meaning. If it requires bad players to get better in order to have a decent record, then that�s the way it needs to be. Will Blizzard learn from that mistake? I guess we�ll have to play a couple hundred games of Starcraft II and find out.

Back in the day I noticed there were a lot of backstabbers on ladder and I also knew people would lose games to exploit the system, but I never connected the two. Like most, I stopped laddering consistently after my account got reset a couple of times. Reading this makes me think I should have just tanked my ladder ranking by going 0-10 to get easy games. It would've made starting over a lot less daunting.

Eregos fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Dec 28, 2015

# ? Dec 28, 2015 23:01

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

I've started replaying the WC3 campaign and it's so drat good. The Key of Three Moons is kind of bullshit on hard though.

# ? Jan 9, 2016 12:20

sirtommygunn: Mar 7, 2013

SirSamVimes posted:

I've started replaying the WC3 campaign and it's so drat good. The Key of Three Moons is kind of bullshit on hard though.

gently caress those 3 missions vs the elves, they're all a god damned grind and it always feels like you don't have the right set of units for the mission you're playing. Nothing interesting happens story-wise either, it just feels like they had to pad out the size of that campaign.

Also gently caress the finale for the Undead campaign, it's the hardest mission in the game and it isn't even close.

# ? Jan 9, 2016 21:39

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

The other two aren't so bad. In the first, you can control the defense by only busting open one path through the trees and the third is easy if you don't let any runners through. The Key though....

# ? Jan 10, 2016 08:14

sirtommygunn: Mar 7, 2013

SirSamVimes posted:

The other two aren't so bad. In the first, you can control the defense by only busting open one path through the trees and the third is easy if you don't let any runners through. The Key though....

I didn't find any of the three hard, just annoying and time-consuming, but yeah Key of the Three Moons is on a whole other level of bullshit compared to the other two. As a whole those 3 missions are just a huge pain to go through on a re-run, hard mode or not.

# ? Jan 10, 2016 08:26

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

I'd say that the Long March is dumber than any undead mission.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 07:46

Eregos: Aug 17, 2006; A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?

SirSamVimes posted:

I'd say that the Long March is dumber than any undead mission.

Whenever I play the Orc campaign I make sure to save all 6 healing wards for that mission. Without them it's impossible to clear the extra coves in first 2/3rds of the mission on hard (unless you backtrack from the health fountains). Even with perfect micro, your units will simply run out of hp and die. And since I insist on fully clearing every map, that would be unacceptable. The hard AI on that mission is ruthless about picking off wounded units so yeah it's unforgiving.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 10:20

Eregos: Aug 17, 2006; A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?

The Long March has nothing on King Arthas though. The first time I beat that on hard I had to load sooo many times. I got so sick of hearing Sylvanas say 'Another human has made it through the pass!' I would immediately say out loud 'Another human being has made it through the pass!' I've never demanded the slaughter of innocent refugees with as much glee. Back then my micro was much worse which that mission punishes heavily. It was the only mission I'd occasionally lose patience with and activate WhosYourDaddy. Especially when that BS happened where the trigger for refugees would bug out and the game would *claim* refugees escaped even though every entrance is covered with shades and consecutive layers of defense. I think there's a bug in that map having to do with no path existing to the exits (achieved with blocking units on hold position), wherein the game falsely claims refugees have escaped. I might test that on the map editor later, just load it up and literally block the entrances with trees or rocks.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 10:37

Linear Zoetrope: Nov 28, 2011; A hero must cook

Half the TFT Undead campaign is kinda bullshit, IMO. The Sylvanas missions are almost all extremely difficult on hard. The only one I find pretty easy is the one where they give you like 10 free minutes to get 80% of the way to victory. The last time I played, I gave up on the one where she and Garithos have to take out a big undead base in the center. Not looking forward to that one in my LP.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 10:42

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

Eregos posted:

Whenever I play the Orc campaign I make sure to save all 6 healing wards for that mission. Without them it's impossible to clear the extra coves in first 2/3rds of the mission on hard (unless you backtrack from the health fountains). Even with perfect micro, your units will simply run out of hp and die. And since I insist on fully clearing every map, that would be unacceptable. The hard AI on that mission is ruthless about picking off wounded units so yeah it's unforgiving.

It's the first mission that I gave up on clearing out all the nooks and crannies.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 11:52

Razakai: Sep 15, 2007; People are afraid
To merge on the freeway
Disappear here

Does anyone remember a custom campaign called Cryptrobbers? That was fantastic but it looks like all download links for it are dead, does anyone have a copy?

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:54

sirtommygunn: Mar 7, 2013

Jsor posted:

Half the TFT Undead campaign is kinda bullshit, IMO. The Sylvanas missions are almost all extremely difficult on hard. The only one I find pretty easy is the one where they give you like 10 free minutes to get 80% of the way to victory. The last time I played, I gave up on the one where she and Garithos have to take out a big undead base in the center. Not looking forward to that one in my LP.

I actually enjoyed the Garithos mission a lot, I just wish the bases weren't on exact opposite sides of the map. Maybe putting them both on the left side with some kind of unpassable wall in the middle (possibly an optional quest to destroy the wall too?) would have worked better for me. That and making an "optional" quest to complete the unit set up for the human base made it a significantly larger pain in the rear end than it needed to be.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:09

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

I don't remember any RoC or TFT mission being particularly hard but I don't know if I played those campaigns on hard, maybe I should replay them sometime.

Couldn't you build Nerubian towers on King Arthas or am I misremembering that?

I really liked the blood elf / naga campaign :v:

. As for the TFT scourge campaign gently caress all the missions between the sylvanas missions and the battle for icecrown.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:10

Poil: Mar 17, 2007

Zoness posted:

Couldn't you build Nerubian towers on King Arthas or am I misremembering that?

No, only units. A very limited selection and there are three bases to cover with different units at each.

Poil fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jan 11, 2016

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:13

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

Poil posted:

No, only units.

But sylvanas's side had the banshees that you could use to mind control all the powerful human units with right? Kel'thuzad had necros that could cripple anything threatening and Arthas just had a ghoul/abom wall?

I definitely remember some absurd gimmick in that mission at least

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:16

Poil: Mar 17, 2007

Zoness posted:

But sylvanas's side had the banshees that you could use to mind control all the powerful human units with right? Kel'thuzad had necros that could cripple anything threatening and Arthas just had a ghoul/abom wall?

I definitely remember some absurd gimmick in that mission at least

Yes that's is true. Still a bit annoying at times however. Sending swarms of skeletons at the villages after killing a caravan was pretty fun.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:18

Linear Zoetrope: Nov 28, 2011; A hero must cook

I recall King Arthas being more laborious than hard. I recall beating it by being very careful and meticulous, where I recall the definition of "careful and meticulous" being around and hour and 45 minutes.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:23

Poil: Mar 17, 2007

Did you also only focus on one part at the time because doing anything else is too difficult and leads to leaks everywhere? :v:

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:39

sirtommygunn: Mar 7, 2013

It took me so long to beat King Arthas on hard that I ran out of gold for Arthas on that mission. gently caress that mission.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 23:06

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

I feel proud of myself because I just completed Twilight of the Gods legitimately for the first time, and did it on hard. It's been several years since I really tackled WC3, and I'm much better at video games than I used to be.

# ? Jan 12, 2016 09:51

Eregos: Aug 17, 2006; A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?

On Twilight of the Gods hard I've found mass hyppogryphs combined with ancient protectors to be the only solid non-exploitative strat. With a couple bears for healing/roar. All the other night elf units are basically irrelevant, regardless of micro skill. I aim to hold Jaina's base until ~32 minutes left but most of the mission should be at Thrall's base, which you need to hold until under 10 minutes. My best non-exploit performance was to hold Thrall's base until the very end, albeit with only his fortress left, flaming and on fire, Thrall dead, all ancient protectors dead, all hyppogryphs dead, and Furion and Tyrande deep in the red. Naturally, the mission is dramatically easier with the invulnerability potion/town hall scroll/goblin landmine exploit. With that you can easily save Thrall and Jaina's bases. Even if you play legit, the mission really intends for you to use goblin landmines against the crazier land waves in the middle of the mission.

As for King Arthas, I've discovered the mission is dramatically more palatable if you play the start perfectly. At the very start, take arthas, kel thuzad, and a couple abominations to the middle of the map. Save just before they get there, and use their goblin landmines on the 3 altars and enemy units. Kel'Thuzad can also use Frost armor+ Death and Decay. You lose your abominations but ideally you destroy the 3 altars, and Arthas and Kel'Thuzad survive and return to their respective corners. This way you only have to deal with each Paladin once, instead of them slowing down the entire mission. Afterwards the safest move is to be defensive as hell and just possess militia captains until Sylvanas has a full control group, allowing her to clear her side with relative ease and come over to help the others. It's still a long mission though and takes about 45 minutes.

# ? Jan 19, 2016 21:20

Amnomia: Jun 12, 2003

warcraft 3 Warcraft 3 WARCRAFT 3

# ? Feb 14, 2016 01:35

on the computer: Jan 4, 2012

I love warcraft 3 and i love to play it

# ? Feb 14, 2016 13:11

Amnomia: Jun 12, 2003

Lacklustre Hero posted:

I love warcraft 3 and i love to play it

ITS a pretty good game.

# ? Feb 15, 2016 18:57

SirSamVimes: Jul 21, 2008; ~* Challenge *~

I just got up to King Arthas.

# ? Feb 17, 2016 06:42

Amnomia: Jun 12, 2003

JAINA PROUDMOORE

# ? Feb 29, 2016 08:40

OhFunny: Jun 26, 2013; EXTREMELY PISSED AT THE DNC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgBPaj4o5KY

Incoming modern Battle.net support and probably better modern OS comparability like D2 just received.

# ? Mar 12, 2016 18:55

Zorodius: Feb 11, 2007; EA GAMES' MASTERPIECE 'MADDEN 2018 G.O.A.T. EDITION' IS A GLORIOUS TRIUMPH OF ART AND TECHNOLOGY. IT BRINGS GAMEDAY RIGHT TO THE PLAYER AND WHOEVER SAYS OTHERWISE CAN, YOU GUESSED IT...
SUCK THE SHIT STRAIGHT OUT OF MY OWN ASSHOLE.

BUY IT.

TFT's Hard campaign is much more difficult than SC2 on Brutal. Part of that is probably that SC2 had a lot more playtesting and they polished away the squirrelly parts, but also SC2 is a game where a single good action makes an impact, whereas WC3 feels like you're gradually pushing back against a fire hose.

Also there's no way to beat TFT's last Hard mission besides manipulating the AI.

# ? Mar 13, 2016 02:21

sirtommygunn: Mar 7, 2013

Define manipulating the AI, because I won by:

1. Making sure I always had 2 control points, both of which had a fuckton of towers on them to slow Illidan's attacking force down long enough for me to respond.
2. If Illidan's force is too strong to beat back, simply build up and take the closest control point that he is not sitting in.
3. Wait for Illidan's attack, crush it, then immediately attack Vashj's base
4. When Vashj's base is destroyed, switch to Kael's base.
5. When both assistant forces are destroyed, switch to taking a control point after each Illidan attack.
6. After about 2 hours, win.

Could probably skip destroying Kael's base if I was better at microing and better at anticipating attacks on my base.

# ? Mar 13, 2016 04:07

Rand alPaul: Feb 3, 2010; by Nyc_Tattoo

Hard campaign is way more difficult than Brutal SC2 mostly because some of the unit variations in SC2 are hilariously overpowered. I mean the Zerg and Protoss campaigns had units that respawned upon death.

Also I think he's referring to a glitch where Illidan will keep retrying to capture one spot and then never take the last control point.

# ? Mar 13, 2016 07:43

Node: May 20, 2001; KICKED IN THE COOTER; Taco Defender

You guys are tempting me to install WC3+FT and play through it again. On hard.

# ? Mar 14, 2016 09:13

The Kins: Oct 2, 2004

Patch is out: http://us.battle.net/en/forum/topic/20743004520

quote:

Specific Changes & Improvements
- Throw away that old PowerPC Mac in the closet, we�ve created a new installer to support Mac 10.10 and 10.11
- Improved compatibility with Windows 7, 8.1, and 10
- Fixed a crash caused by Chain Lightning

Known Issues
- Windows 8.1 and 10 saved games are still stored in a location that requires running as system admin
- Some graphical issues with the cinematics are still occurring
- Changes to gamma settings will not take effect in windowed mode
- Cyrillic characters are still not displaying
- Disabled ambient sound while a MIDI issue is being resolved
- Mac 10.9 and earlier are not supported
- Mac build does not support the editor

# ? Mar 15, 2016 10:16

SirDrone: Jul 23, 2013; I am so sick of these star wars

And the update broke the hosting bots that must people use to set up games, lmao.

# ? Mar 15, 2016 13:26

Linear Zoetrope: Nov 28, 2011; A hero must cook

That cinematic display bug is really annoying, hope they fix that one in 2017.

# ? Mar 15, 2016 16:18

emdash: Oct 19, 2003; and?

https://twitter.com/wykrhm/status/709799162951430144

idk his source, but this guy is a 100% factposter in the dota community so i doubt he's bullshitting

emdash fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Mar 15, 2016

# ? Mar 15, 2016 18:52

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

oh man i wonder what the new maps are

kill all poison creeps please

# ? Mar 15, 2016 19:01

L. Ron Mexico: May 14, 2005

gonna be Lost Temple, Gnoll Wood, and Broken Shard or something. Maybe with a reskin of LT to make it use the outlands tileset

# ? Mar 15, 2016 19:44

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

can they put like 2 taverns on lost temple or something

I always banned it playing random because tavernless sucks (but left it on for humans only since it was one of the best fast expand maps) and only human and orc spammers enjoy that map.

# ? Mar 15, 2016 20:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 03:00

kaworu: Jul 23, 2004

That's really funny - I just started replaying this lately (I haven't played it in years and have never played it all the way through on Hard, not even *close*. Not even sure I beat it on Normal all the way through, I wasn't very good at this game even though I liked it.

Anyway, I'm running Windows 10 so there were some weird issues I had to work out to get the resolution right, and even then the cinematic didn't work when I got to the end of the Human campaign - that really awesome cinematic when Arthas stomps into the throne room and murders "[his] Father the King." But it works perfectly now, after downloading the new patch.

I actually remember when I first saw that, playing the game in my room on my little 1024x768 CRT monitor, and it was just the craziest/coolest thing ever. In part because I had never played a game that went into such a shockingly evil direction, and had you playing as this vile protagonist for half of the entire campaign. I mean, the human campaign is basically just Arthas getting crazier and crazier as you murder and slaughter various sorts of people and creatures en-masse throughout the game, and his command responses get more and more ironic. Then the table just flips entirely over and you're Arthas commanding the undead and it makes perfect sense.

In retrospect, I have to say that the overall plot and style of the initial Wacraft III story is kind of really obviously and heavily influenced by GRRM and the Game of Thrones of series. And it's funny that I didn't even realize it until now, but really, there are so goddamn many commonalities. There's the Arthas arc, which in tone is reasonably similar overall to the tone of ASOIAF in general - a mediaval/magical-era kingdom is being invaded by the undead from the frozen north, and poo poo just keeps getting worse and worse and worse with every mission in the campaign, climaxing with a main character getting ruthless and surprisingly murdered at the end of the first campaign. Sounds really kinda familiar, as a premise/tone.

I mean, jeez, you've even got eerie semi-living trees with faces on them! And I know, a lot of this stuff originated in Tolkien (The Ancients are way more like Ents, the tribes of Dwarves, Elves, and orcs and their overall characteristics/abilities, etc.) Overall it's much more Tolkien-esque like most high-fantasy.

However, that being said I still feel like the overall tone of Arthas and his arc in Reign of Chaos at least feels seriously GRRM-esque in terms of the darkness and now it kinda seems obvious that that was the influence that possibly gave it a bit of a punch. The Undead as a race reminds me a fair bit of The Others as a race, with the iciness and ancient evil of it all. The terrifying concept of an advancing army where the more troops who fall on your side the stronger the enemy's army gets.

kaworu fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Mar 15, 2016

# ? Mar 15, 2016 23:35

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Retro Games > WarCraft III: When Men Were Men, Orcs Were Orcs, and Customs Were Fun

«‹›92 »