People really want a save feature

What makes you so sure?

most people don't use them in starcraft 2, why should most people use the same features here?

Because PA is a spiritual successor to TA and Supcom, not StarCraft?

can you provide any data on this?

You don't get to dictate how other people run their computers. You are not the pinnacle of be-all-end-all computer usage. You may find how you run your computer efficient, and that's alright, but who the hell are you to insinuate your way is the only way? People aren't like you, and you're not the best there is. I think you should get off your high horse for a second and realize we're not you, and we don't want to be you. We like being us. And most (not all) people on the forums seem to have a general idea that what we do is not the only option, and doesn't always work for other people. At least I would like to think so.

Also this. PA is a whole different beast from SC2. Games in SC2 will not last for hours and hours on end with 30 or 40 players. Also, the game really requires to be played from the beginning or you're at a severe disadvantage for not controlling your build while in PA your losses are minimal in the grand scheme, which unlike SC2, is what PA is all about.

Don't feed the troll...

I wouldn't use a save game feature as much as others but it would definately have its uses. And to the douche who says that replays are not used

you're right, I don't get to dictate how people use their computers - but if they're retarded enough to need a save feature because they can't pause and sleep their machine, it's my duty to tell them that a save feature isn't necessary - at all.

You're ignoring so many scenarios with that. What if I want to save a GW game I've been playing to play a multiplayer game inbetween?
What about multiplayer saves? They can be helpful as well.

well, think about it - if most people don't play on the ladder, who is going to use the multiplayer only replay resume features?

I don't know the exact way it is implemented, but to create build orders such a system is golden.
Also in PA that feature would not be multiplayer only. (Wtf it is for SC2?)

1. open another instance of the game, or just, you know, just finish the GW game first, they take like 5 minutes tops unless it's a boss battle.
2. I've states this many times already in this thread, multiplayer saves are a NOVELTY that most people will NEVER use, galactic war will be used by ALMOST EVERYONE, I'd say that takes priority.

Yes. if you have a replay with 2 players, you need 2 players to resume the replay.

"out of memory". Not everbody has enough memory or wants to waste it with sleeping the computer and not even closing game all the time.
Also you are basically saying people should not be allowed to save because you think it is not needed.
Another fun part about saving that breaks your concept: What about people who want to retry a scenario many times? Like save the game before that big boss battle and do something potentially stupid? You can't reset the state of the game without real savegames.
That's also HIGHLY helpful for stuff like modding and debugging: Just create a state ingame you need for tests once and then just reload it as many times as you need to for your tests.

lol well yeah... so what?

Or AI.

I'd have to check, but I don't believe you can put the AI in a player's spot.

so... that's the answer to your question, obv

Courtesy of save games.

One of Uber's plan is the ability to sub in AI into a replay or a save it could be a 1v1 up to 4o player free-for-all.

Then you my friend are very lucky.

It's common knowledge that a drive can fail at, literally, anytime. it's estimated that 5-8% of all drives fail in their first year (SATA). By the 4 year mark, 25-30% of all drives fail. This is why manufacturers and enthusiasts alike all greatly recommend backups like it's a religion. Even if you know what your doing, time and time again has shown that drives can die at any time. Also, it's widely known that the older drives last much better than the current drives of our generation; however they still fall victim to the same principles.

So that minuscule difference you speak of can make the difference in drive failure or not.

I must be very luck as well. Never saw any drive failure. Even that old 10gb drive that was lieing around for ages in some corner, unprotected from dust dirt and random whatever influences worked when I put it into a computer for the lulzs.
I don't have much data that's valuable enough to save anyway though. Only small stuff that I just put into svn repositories or github xD