This is not some sort of "i will leave if i dont get what i want" kind of post, god no lol. Im just letting my thoughts out as i feel, so please bare with me
To get this one started ill start with a quote from the "Gameplay Feedback" thread (Reply #111)
With regard to the issue at hand, it seems that a lot of people expected the Vasari to be extremely powerful individually, balanced by a lack of numbers: specifically, much increased resource and fleet capacity costs. I don't really see that this is incompatible with them being a more finesse-oriented race, in the manner that you've stated. I think that most people would agree (though clearly I can't speak for them) that what they want is a balance where one-on-one a Vasari warship will decisively defeat its approximate TEC counterpart -- but the TEC will always have superior numbers of ships, such that resource-to-resource the Vasari can't quite stand head to head with their enemies. The Vasari are technologically superior, but their population is very limited, and losses should hurt them far more than they hurt the entrenched, numerically-superior TEC.
Thats exactly what i (as i can only speak for myself) were expecting. I were very surprised when i started up the Vasari in a single player game (to test them out), that why the cost the same as the TEC, and wy i were so easly losing in combat against the AI TEC. I didnt think much about it as i were just fooling around and that i believed the AI had become much better.
So after that, i decided to play a Multiplayer game, just to find myself losing almost every encounter i got with the TEC. I was like, huh? this cant be right (even against the pirates). So after a few games, were i could see that the Vasari wasnt as ive had thought they would been, I made the "Vasari underpowered", as i believed something were wrong.
But to see (as of Yarlens post (Reply #106)) what ive been believing (with all the interviews/reviews/previews and the cronos fansite) for around 2 years aint being true, is like being stabbed in the heart lol. Its like your expecting some really cool but your given Star Trek legacy
Thats why ive been defending what i believed in the "Vasari is underpowered!?", "The Vasari are NOT the fricking PROTOSS!" and the "Gameplay Feedback" threads.
Yes i know its a gameplay beta where we test balance ect. but to hear now after so long they aint going to be as expected is a huge dissepointment
Ive never been much of a tactical/number control freakess player, i do find some of my own ways to play, but many comes from replays where i get ideas and combining them with my own. But for me the coolness aint in those, its in the fun and different ways you can play the races. Just now the Vasari just seems like any other RTS game out there with just a few twist here and there.
Like in supcom all 3 factions are almost the same with a few differences in play stile and units uniqueness.
I were even able to be among the 500 best, but got soo bored as i had to play like everyone else to be there (oh and sins beta 1 was about to be released
)
As far as i understood what Blair said in the "The Vasari are NOT the fricking PROTOSS!" thread (Reply #68), he was into for changing the Vasari to have lessor units and TEC to have more. And he used the word "exagerate" and i had to look that up, and it means HUGE difference, but got confused because of this in the "Vasari is underpowered!?" thread (Reply #112):
(Schod)there really isnt any MAJOR changes to be made.
(Multianna)oh but there will
(Ron Lugge)
The devs haven't confirmed anything about major that I've seen (though I'm still digging through the backlog...) A minor rebalance towards strength in individuals, yes. The kind of radical ones you guys want? No.
So maybe he didnt read it, i dunno, but with Yarlens post this was just way dissepointing.
I dont write long posts unless it is worth taking a long time to say, cause of my lack of words, also a reason i dont discuss this on #sins IRC
I didnt know what to call this kind of post, so i called it feedback
