EPTSuggestion #1: Fuel for Terran buildings
Summary: This has been suggested numerous times by many TLer's. The summary is that Terran buildings, which can lift off and land (duh says the reader), have a set amount of fuel and when the level hits zero: no more lifting off.
Pro's: It would make it less frustrating to Protoss and Zerg players if this feature came to pass. No more chasing a Command Centre around the map. The Terran player will be forced to land sooner or later. Also, this hinders the Terran's ability use their buildings to see the high ground. This is something that Terran's do often; they'll fly a Barracks or Factory (maybe Starport... but I doubt it) and they'll fly the building up on the high ground where a Zerg or Protoss player will have units stationed. The Terran will Siege their Tanks and proceed to shell the Protoss or Zerg army. No more of that. And finally, no more Terran Cheese on maps like Metalopolis where there is a smokescreen inside you base. This possible feature will not completely stop Terran cheese but it will happen less often.
Con's: Say a Command Centre is trying to get from point A to point B and has to clear a chasm to do so. So what happens if that same Command Centre runs out of fuel halfway across? Is it just allowed to fall? Is the Terran player awarded a refund of all their minerals they just lost? If your a Terran player, you're are going to be pretty pissed off about losing a CC over a chasm. And what should be the set amount of fuel and how fast it should be depleted? These could be major issues.
Suggestion #2: Campaign units in Mutliplayer
Summary: There were some really interesting units in the WoL campaign that could have crossed over to the multiplayer aspect of the game. There were classic units like the Firebat, Medic, Vulture, Goliath, Science Vessel and the Wraith along with new units like the Diamondback, Spectre, Predator and the Hercules. So what happens if they all made the jump to the Multiplayer?
Pro's: New builds is the big one. There would be new strategies that a Terran can use if all these units made the jump. It would be unpredictable and thus your opponent would have to scout more. Nostalgia would be a pretty big factor too. Engaging a Zerg with a Marine/Medic/Firebat army would sure bring back memories. Destroying a Protoss player with Goliaths, Tanks and a few Science Vessels would feel out of this world! It feels like you're playing Brood War only with better graphics and a few new units. Finally, using the new units in Multiplayer. Using a Diamondback to chase fleeing Zerglings, doing a Herecules drop and using your cloaked Spectre to reek all kinds of unholy havoc would be great!...
Con's: Notice how all of these units are Terran? You've got a good eye if you do and if didn't spot it, that's okay because here's why this idea wouldn't work until the thrid expansion. In fact, I just said it. This would cripple the armies of the Zerg and Protoss; there wouldn't be any reason to play as those races anymore. Implementing this idea this early would kill some of the StarCraft fanbase. Some people are really hardcore about their race. They think anyone who plays Terran has no self-respect (*wink*) and simply won't play anymore. Would it be better to introduce this feature after HotS and LotV? Perhaps but some will argue it would be better not to do this at all. It would also be next to impossible for players in the lower tiers to micro or macro. There would be too much going on and too many hotkeys to remember. But not only does this hurt the Zerg and the Protoss, this hurts the Terran as well. There would be no reason to use the Medivac anymore now that you have the Medic back and a huge Dropship at your disposal. Firebats may be come obsolete because of the Hellion. In short, it would just throw the whole game into a blender. We should keep it as it is right now. After the two expansions are released? We'll see.
Suggestion #3: Increase Unit Cap
Summary: Like the original and Brood War, StarCraft 2 has a unit cap of 200 per player. But what if Blizzard decided to change this?
Pro's: More units, more carnage. This possible new feature would allow for more offensive units in the game instead of just 60 devoted to SCV's/Drones/Probes. This would also make for a very micro-heavy game. Managing that many units at once takes serious skill (which we I appreciate and envy) and it could be the difference between a winner and a loser. The focus on macro wouldn't be as important as micro but it still would be important nonetheless. It also allows for some pretty bitchin' unit diversity. All units could come into play if the unit cap is increased.
Con's: Mo' units, mo' problems. First issue that I see in doing this would be the massive lag you would have if you have a low video card or just a inferior computer in general. More units could seriously kill your computer if it is overworked and not given enough time to cool down. Secondly, is the problems that casters would have. Seeing so many units in one condensed space could limit the casters ability to proper comment on the game. Next, what should the new unit cap be? 300? 400? 500? How does Blizzard go about figuring out what it should be. How much is too much? And finally, the last issue I see is the using this new unit cap in 2v2'/3v3's/4v4's/FFA's. If you are in a game with four or more people, it is going to be hard to play due to the amount of massive units in play. Can you imagine four players with a maxed out army with the unit cap of 300? It would be a total clusterfuck.
So do the pro's outweigh the con's or are you a pessimistic person? Also, if I missed anything, feel free to point it out or make more suggestions in the comment box below.
Poll: Which of these would you like to see in StarCraft 2?
None of them (41)
69%
Suggestion #1 (12)
20%
Suggestion #3 (5)
8%
All of them (1)
2%
Suggestion #2 (0)
0%
59 total votes
Suggestion #1 (12)
Suggestion #3 (5)
All of them (1)
Suggestion #2 (0)
59 total votes
Your vote: Which of these would you like to see in StarCraft 2?
(Vote): Suggestion #1
(Vote): Suggestion #2
(Vote): Suggestion #3
(Vote): All of them
(Vote): None of them
