Starcraft 1 Beta had Yellow Minerals!

I dont know how many people know this but Starcraft 1 beta had yellow minerals. Also you can see that resources used to be more distant from your Command Center.
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta24.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta40.jpg
Link
http://gaming.feedfury.com/content/8...-and-beta.html


What do you think happened to these yellow minerals?

Suppose you couldn't build your Command Center close to resources. Do you think that would increase or improve harassment as part of Starcraft gameplay?

That's strange. Looks like minerals and gas were very similar. Never seen that image before.

Are you sure those are gold minerals, separate from current SC1 minerals? It's possible that those were just... SC1 beta minerals and they got changed.

That's cool - I've never some of those two SC beta screenies before :P.

I think that they just imagined having both minerals and gas being harvested in the same manner - Warcraft 2-goldmine-style. Then they changed it to the system we all know and love today. :]

The SCV's wireframe looks a lot different from the model... that's bizarre. And the academy looks like an addon to the barracks... where did these come from? I thought I had seen all the alpha and beta Starcraft stuff...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

Are you sure those are gold minerals, separate from current SC1 minerals? It's possible that those were just... SC1 beta minerals and they got changed.

---

Nope there yellow minerals
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta38.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta37.jpg

Maybe was a 3rd resource.

In the top screenshots you see yellow minerals and Vespene gas as the two resources in the top right corner, in the bottom screenshots(on this thread page) you see normal minerals and Vespene gas as the resource.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Nope there yellow minerals
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta38.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta37.jpg

---

I don't think these two screenies are in the same build as the first two. Look at the resource counter. In the first, you have gold substance and gray substance. By looking at the SCVs, one has a gold substance and another has the gray one.

The second set shows the minerals and gas that we know now. And while the probe carries the same gray stuff, I imagine that to be the universal gas containers. In the first image sets, you see a big of green as well, so I assume the gray stuff are just vespene containers.

SIDE-NOTE:
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta19.jpg
Who's bright idea was it to have tanks able to shoot air units at all? That's not even close to being realistic. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kacaier

Who's bright idea was it to have tanks able to shoot air units at all? That's not even close to being realistic. :p

---

And marines shooting down a battlecruiser is very realistic????

Also look at the dragoon in front of the defiler... It looks that it had some kind of attack.

Judging by the screenies, it seems that they are normal minerals but with a different look.

Notice that the mineral icon is yellow.

Nevermind - the answer is yes :) the tank is hitting the Muta

Mods pls delete

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KadajSouba

Also look at the dragoon in front of the defiler... It looks that it had some kind of attack.

---

I think the Defiler did, originally, have an attack, something called Acid Spore, or just Acid.

I remember when I first read about StarCraft, before I played it, that units had their own military ranks, and I was excited to see them get promoted on the battle field. I was disappointed they didn't.

I remember a pic on the back of the box showing Tanks hitting flying units, too. Beta screens.

The mystery resource: Creampuff with whip cream. The morale building resource.

Wow. Never saw these before.

In the alpha, spellcasters, or most spellcasters, had some sort of attack. Whereas Tassadar kept the High Templar's Psi Assault, the Defiler attack was dropped from the game entirely.

And what is that SWEET addon for the Starport? That looks WICKED!

Does anybody else like the old mineral sprites as opposed to the newer ones? Giant crystals growing out of the ground in plain sight always bothered me.

Well, finally, an air attack for the Siege Tank makes sense, unless nobody has heard of guided shells. Anyhow, it would give people a reason to use them in mobile mode.

Wait, one more thing: Does anybody prefer the old art style to the style that made it to StarCraft vanilla? Truth be told, I actually prefer the old art for the Sunken Colonies and the Spire.
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta32.jpg
Well, yeah, a lot of the unit appearances improved, but still...

I like the Vanilla version. That spire looks like a slaughter house of some sort.

Also, tanks shooting air units makes total sense, hasn't anyone ever watched Iron Man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caliban113

Nevermind - the answer is yes :) the tank is hitting the Muta

Mods pls delete

---

Well it could be the tank just missing the reaver (so the shot is far away from it). And it's pretty likely they hadn't sorted out the fact that the shot should be under the mutalisk rather than on top. Looks like quite a few things were still to be changed.
You might be right of course^^ I'm just speculating.

edit: yeah I hadn't read the next comments :p I guess it's settled then!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

I like the Vanilla version. That spire looks like a slaughter house of some sort.

Also, tanks shooting air units makes total sense, hasn't anyone ever watched Iron Man?

---

Hehehe! That was ridiculous! :)
Depending on air unit size, movement speed, and distance, i think a tank could be able to take one down. But for small and fast targets, forget it.

It looks like that big yellow mineral thing was the SC counterpart to the WCII gold mine back then. The blue minerals probably didn't exist yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QuirelWait, one more thing: Does anybody prefer the old art style to the style that made it to StarCraft vanilla? Truth be told, I actually prefer the old art for the Sunken Colonies and the Spire.
[url

http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alphabeta/beta/beta32.jpg[/url]
Well, yeah, a lot of the unit appearances improved, but still...

---

I sure did. I followed SC1's development constantly from the moment I heard about it, and I liked a lot of the earlier stuff a lot more than the final art.

Blizzard does that, but it's part of them refining what they make.

Had you ever heard about how WC3 was originally going to be? It was ACTUALLY going to be groundbreaking. The original design was EXTREMELY different from the final product.

The way they had the Undead designed was really, really interesting. I believe the 6 (Yes, they started wanting to do 6 races) different races often used different resources, and the Undead were the most unique, using only corpses and mana to build buildings and units.

The Necromancer was a "building" hero, who basically sat at your base, sacrificed units for mana, and you used the mana to summon in buildings. Killing things gave you corpses as a resource, which let you create units (and there was supposed to be this undead hand animation that would come out of the ground, seize recently slain units, and drag them under the earth).

Basically what I'm saying is: Blizzard's original ideas and what they actually make a game out of are often drastically different. Some really neat ideas don't make it because they just didn't work out, as fun as they sound, and other ideas don't make it for Blizzard knows why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ManjiSanji

The way they had the Undead designed was really, really interesting. I believe the 6 (Yes, they started wanting to do 6 races) different races often used different resources, and the Undead were the most unique, using only corpses and mana to build buildings and units.

The Necromancer was a "building" hero, who basically sat at your base, sacrificed units for mana, and you used the mana to summon in buildings. Killing things gave you corpses as a resource, which let you create units (and there was supposed to be this undead hand animation that would come out of the ground, seize recently slain units, and drag them under the earth).

---

Do you know anywhere I could find out more information on that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ManjiSanji

Basically what I'm saying is: Blizzard's original ideas and what they actually make a game out of are often drastically different. Some really neat ideas don't make it because they just didn't work out, as fun as they sound, and other ideas don't make it for Blizzard knows why.

---

I 100% agree. But I think the key is trying over and over to improve on what youve done even if it keeps not working. If it was easy to improve on Dune II someone would have done it long before.

I've been looking around a bit, and I've not been able to find anything about the old version of the game, unfortunately, but I'll keep looking. It was very early, like the old images we see of SC1 that looked like Warcraft 2 kind of a difference. The graphics weren't bad, it was just a substantially different looking game. There were wayyyyyyyy less units, and everything had more of an up-close view, instead of a top-down view.

Wow, it's amazing how many people haven't seen this yet. When StarCraft 2 was announced I went on a SC1 beta information frenzy to get a guess on how much will change in the SC2 beta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KadajSouba

And marines shooting down a battlecruiser is very realistic????

---

Yes, I find that a lot more plausible. :p A small projectile going at hypersonic speeds will hit a BC. Now, doing any real damage like 5 to a 600 HP BC sounds ridiculous, but the hitting is there nevertheless. Guided tank shells will never hit anything aerial, unless it was a flying helicopter that happened to be hovering right in front of the tank's barrel. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kacaier

Yes, I find that a lot more plausible. :p A small projectile going at hypersonic speeds will hit a BC. Now, doing any real damage like 5 to a 600 HP BC sounds ridiculous, but the hitting is there nevertheless. Guided tank shells will never hit anything aerial, unless it was a flying helicopter that happened to be hovering right in front of the tank's barrel. :p

---

Depends on how fast the aerial vehicle is going and their trajectory. A guided shell hitting an aerial vehicle is not as outlandish as you think. In Ironman(Yes I'm referencing a fictional source, but hey SC is fiction as well.), a Tank shoots down Iron-Man/ Tony Stark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow Archon

Depends on how fast the aerial vehicle is going and their trajectory. A guided shell hitting an aerial vehicle is not as outlandish as you think. In Ironman(Yes I'm referencing a fictional source, but hey SC is fiction as well.), a Tank shoots down Iron-Man/ Tony Stark.

---

A guided shell is that, a shell that is guided. Because of this, it's only momentous force is from the origin launch. It cannot gain velocity. So, a guided shell can only move side to side and control in a small degree its descent. With those constraints, a tank's turret would have to track an aerial vehicle and launch at an angle so its arc would be in range of the plane. Imagine the crap load of targeting variables it would have to calculate. The shell is designed for a ground-based, or at the very least, a slow-moving target.

It would be an absolute waste of material and computing resources for the tank's main gun to have the ability shoot a plane down. Not to mention the payoff would be very limited. Majority of a tank's shots would most likely to fail in hitting its target. That's why they have side-tubed GtA missiles, or aerial support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kacaier

A guided shell is that, a shell that is guided. Because of this, it's only momentous force is from the origin launch. It cannot gain velocity. So, a guided shell can only move side to side and control in a small degree its descent. With those constraints, a tank's turret would have to track an aerial vehicle and launch at an angle so its arc would be in range of the plane. Imagine the crap load of targeting variables it would have to calculate. The shell is designed for a ground-based, or at the very least, a slow-moving target.

It would be an absolute waste of material and computing resources for the tank's main gun to have the ability shoot a plane down. Not to mention the payoff would be very limited. Majority of a tank's shots would most likely to fail in hitting its target. That's why they have side-tubed GtA missiles, or aerial support.

---

You are correct that it is impractical, but I was just pointing it out that its not impossible to have a tank shoot down an aircraft with guided shells with the aircraft not being right in front of the Barrels.

Hey man, if a terrorist can shoot the Iron Man going at the speed of sound, anyone can do it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kacaier

It would be an absolute waste of material and computing resources for the tank's main gun to have the ability shoot a plane down. Not to mention the payoff would be very limited. Majority of a tank's shots would most likely to fail in hitting its target. That's why they have side-tubed GtA missiles, or aerial support.

---

Yeah, because a tank needing to transform to deploy an artillery cannon is the epitome of realism.

Scorpions can shoot down Banshees pretty handily in Halo, and all they're packing is a 90mm cannon. I bet a Siege tank could hit a mutalisk if it tried real hard xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quirel

Yeah, because a tank needing to transform to deploy an artillery cannon is the epitome of realism.

---

Again, at least that's a possible thing. The reason I have so much problem with it, is because it's just downright silly. Yes, shooting down a BC is silly, whatever. But that's like saying the firebat can shoot air units. Maybe if it was an extreme pressurized chamber that can shoot plasma discharges a thousand feet into the air, and even that wouldn't reach. But that's where I find it ridiculous.

I'm not talking entirely of realism. I'm talking about something that wouldn't be done. The people who go on about "oh, so-and-so is sooo realistic" is merely using a blanket analogy to defend any postulation. But whatever, it was more of a joke. Argue it if you want.

Very interesting thread. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ManaPirate

I bet a Siege tank could hit a mutalisk if it tried real hard xD

---

Shoot down a small, fast moving target? Yeah, by opening the hatch and shooting them down with a machinegun. Don't even count on the main gun, it will be nearly impossible to aim (assuming the angle allows you to do it), and would be overkill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUUeq...layer_embedded

While the 'yellow minerals' in StarCraft I did not function the same way they do in StarCraft II, I think it would be safe to say that they may have gotten the idea from it.

After all, accepting that they're gold-coloured just because gold itself is valuable is kind of stupid. There are far more valuable materials that are completely different colours, eg. platinum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUUeq...layer_embedded

---

The Tunguska was designed specifically for anti-air purposes, so it is definitely going to be competent at it.

Where are people getting screenshots of this?

Is there a leaked SC1 beta out there somewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trace wm

Where are people getting screenshots of this?

Is there a leaked SC1 beta out there somewhere?

---

Look closely and see if you can spot the link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

I dont know how many people know this but Starcraft 1 beta had yellow minerals. Also you can see that resources used to be more distant from your Command Center.
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta24.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~aggel005/alph...eta/beta40.jpg
Link
http://gaming.feedfury.com/content/8...-and-beta.html


What do you think happened to these yellow minerals?

Suppose you couldn't build your Command Center close to resources. Do you think that would increase or improve harassment as part of Starcraft gameplay?

---

Anyone care to wiegh in on if more distant mining would increase/improve harassment?

So everything we've got is from official Blizzard releases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visions of Khas

I remember when I first read about StarCraft, before I played it, that units had their own military ranks, and I was excited to see them get promoted on the battle field. I was disappointed they didn't.

---

Starcraft 1 did have military ranks, just not in the CnC sense.

http://darrentorpey.com/images/games/starcraft_1.png
See how it says "Master Sergeant" under the Siege Tank's name?

I heard somewhere that it was used to determine pathing priority or something? Not too sure about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kegluneq

Starcraft 1 did have military ranks, just not in the CnC sense.

http://darrentorpey.com/images/games/starcraft_1.png
See how it says "Master Sergeant" under the Siege Tank's name?

I heard somewhere that it was used to determine pathing priority or something? Not too sure about that.

---

He meant they gained ranks for kills, like leveling.