modedit: It should be noted that the OP quoted the paragraph exactly except for removing 1 key word. It should read "We don't want to just add another three units.." Original thread title was "No new units in the sc2 expansions"
According a recent Dustin Browder interview, when asked about Heart of the Swarm, he replied:
"We don't want to add another three units to the game [one new unit per race] for this expansion, three units to the game for the next expansion. That would be a very bloated game for us at that point and the chances that some of those units would be duplicates of other units that already exist in the game in one form or another would be extremely high. So we're looking at the different solutions."
So what do you people think? A StarCraft II expansion that didn't add any new units? Possibly only a new campaign, new tilesets, and new battlenet/gameplay tweaks.
I agree with Browder, there would be WAY too many tech choices if a new unit per race is added in every game, it would lead to a game where the winner is not the better player, but the one that had the luck of choosing the right strategy to use.
I can't believe that. I was hoping so much for additional units to give more diversity to the game. Especially Zerg need more diversity in their army compositions, and not just muta/sling/bling or roach/hydra. So if this is true i am very disappointed
That's fine. It doesn't even rule out the possibility of new units in Legacy of the Void, or new abilities on old units. I'd like to see them get the balance just right on the WoL units than worry about how Lurkers or a brand new unit would need to work or be balanced.
Nothing wrong with not adding new units. As expected, the expansions would just be huge patches for overall improvement of the game + story mode continuation.
So why doesn't each race come with equal amounts of different units to begin with? I think Terran has the most variety followed by Protoss and then Zerg...
So... An >>EXPANSION<< without any new units?? what horseshit is this. Dustin Browder should realize, that its a little strange to release a new pricey expansion without any new units and only make it for the new story is a strange story.
Not a bad idea, but they should at least give something to zerg, they feel so...uh, less expansive than the other two races. Terran has the most flexibility.
Please quote correctly before trying to hype your thread.
We don't want to just add another three units to the game for this expansion, three units to the game for the next expansion.
And although I don't have the source/link right now, in a recent interview with one of the Blizz guys I read that the upcoming expansions will bring back units that we have seen previously (as in 'in Brood War').
He doesn't say there won't be new units, just that there won't be one per race. I wouldn't mind all that much if T don't get a new unit, but I would mind if Z didn't get a new one or two as they have fewer units already
He says they wont add 1 unit per race for a total of 3 new units each expansion pack. You have to take that very literally. He never says there won't be new units.
Just because there won't be new units doesn't mean there won't be changed units, new abilities, etc. I was hoping for new units, but I think they'll make it work. This may or may not be actually true also. This could be their feelings now, which could change. We don't know.
On February 14 2011 05:48 ineedadrink wrote: I bet theyre going to add heroes to the multiplayer game instead.
ew. this is not warcraft dude
Hey I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying that thats what I think the big 'change' will be.
I doubt it as they know the backlash for that would be terrible. Would ruin sc2 if they added hero units to the multiplayer and they know it so I wouldn't worry about that ^_^.
I just hope they give the zerg a new unit at least or bring back scourge .
I think they will add a unit but it might not be for all the races to get a new unit in this expansion is what it sounds like to me. But I could be wrong of course.
Did you purposely miss-quote? I mean seriously, you left out one word in the quote out of the paragraph which changes what he is saying.
"We don't want to just add another three units to the game for this expansion" is what he really said.
I pointed out your general point in the original thread where this interview was posted, i wasnt sure exactly what he was saying. Are they just focusing on new things and leaving out new units, or are they focusing on new things in addition to new units. It doesnt seem very clear to me.
Uh I think that's very good news actually. 2*3 new units would make the game even harder to balance and there would probably be some redundant units without much of a role as a result.
"We don't want to just add another three units to the game for this expansion, three units to the game for the next expansion. That would be a very bloated game for us at that point and the chances that some of those units would be duplicates of other units that already exist in the game in one form or another would be extremely high. So we're looking at the different solutions. We don't know for sure yet, but there will definitely be fixes and changes and various improvements to the multiplayer experience."
Sounds more like some unit may be scrapped... (reaper?)
On February 14 2011 05:48 ineedadrink wrote: I bet theyre going to add heroes to the multiplayer game instead.
ew. this is not warcraft dude
Hey I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying that thats what I think the big 'change' will be.
Based on what exactly? Just a hunch?
There used to be hero units in SC2, look at the old Mothership. They realized it was a stupid idea and changed it to the current form.
Macro is easier, they will have to find some way to increase the depth of the game and if they say they arent going to add new units I'm guessing they'd just add heroes and call it an expansion.
It's OK as a philosophy, but I think this game needs new units. At least IMO, it doesn't feel like what's currently there is going to last years like BW has. Especially Zerg, I really feel like they could use some other unit. Or maybe they will come up with something creative that's not another unit, and I will be impressed.
Lurker/Corsair/DT/Medic took something that was flawed and made it whole, and I think a lot of people are feeling a "flawed" feeling in vanilla sc2 also.
I've pointed out this multiple times. Hotls is not an expansion for multiplayer but a continuation to the sequel after The Wings of Liberty.
Where did people get the idea that Hotls will come with new units in multiplayer? This is a bad move. If they wanted to introduce new units, they would do so in a manner that wont disect players from the rest who are playing Wings of the Liberty and any other expansions.
Chances are we are only going to see new single player campaign and not a single affect on multiplayer. Think about it, introduce more units when the game isnt even balanced? Seriously? Dustin is right. the game will feel bloated as more units are introduced while not perfecting the balance with Liberty.
We don't want to just add another three units to the game for this expansion, three units to the game for the next expansion.
And although I don't have the source/link right now, in a recent interview with one of the Blizz guys I read that the upcoming expansions will bring back units that we have seen previously (as in 'in Brood War').
There is a lot of people who would be pretty upset not to see the return of some of there favorite bw units, but I have pretty good faith in blizz in that if they don't create new units they're probably making a good effort to improve or innovate in other areas. I am hoping for a lot of new battle.net features.
On February 14 2011 06:00 Lemonayd wrote: There is a lot of people who would be pretty upset not to see the return of some of there favorite bw units, but I have pretty good faith in blizz in that if they don't create new units they're probably making a good effort to improve or innovate in other areas. I am hoping for a lot of new battle.net features.
I don't want to see a return of the BW units. I'm not paying another 60 bucks (or even another 20) to see Lurker 2.0. Either give me something new, be it a unit, ability, or whatever, or don't release the expansion-- don't sell me old stuff with new graphics.
The problem with this news might be that they don't change the content in the multiplayer possibly, but just patch it a bit while adding a new campaign.
I for one am only interested in the multiplayer part, but im forced to buy a campaign expansion which im not interested in just to be able to play online again with changes they could apply with a patch too.
He obviously left out the "just" on purpose in order to get some attention for his thread. That's just pathetic.
I was like "can't imagine that going to happen". Checked the Interview and yep. He misquoted. Weird how you can copy past the whole paragraph but somehow, someway a word goes loose
I think P and T may have some units changed/removed while Z will get a tier 1.5 spellcaster equivalent to the sentry. This unit would help with early game defense and late game utility. I imagine Z would have some unit changes aswell.
@dilla Blizzard has repeatedly stated clearly that they are making additions/changes/etc for the multiplayer part of the expansions as well as the new campaigns
I guess i don't really care about new units. However, I do hope they change a few things in the gameplay department. I'd like to see some useless abilities worked on such as neosteel frames and neural parasite. Really, even some unit redoes would be sick(reaper, hydra, carrier, corrupter, ultralisk).
On February 14 2011 06:07 Archerofaiur wrote: They will never be able to get away with not adding new units to multiplayer. Units feel bloated and overlapping? Make it work!
That isn't what they said. They said that they WILL add new units, but will also change or remove existing units to get rid of redundancies and other things that aren't fun.
On February 14 2011 05:48 ineedadrink wrote: I bet theyre going to add heroes to the multiplayer game instead.
Don't even joke about that.
I wouldn't mind them not adding units to be honest. If anything new units would just completely reset all progress made on solving the metagame and delay game balance.
Not just new unit could mean a lot of things. Here are some suggestions to Dustin and the rest of SC2 development team.
Problem with Ladder:
The point system for ladder is too one dimensional. There needs to be more depth to it. For example, people seek to obtain "prestigious" accolades that not many people can earn. The only real motivation to laddering is the portrat that we obtain from winning a certain number of games. But.. What if you expand that further into "Divisions" ? The only reason why Facebook got popular in the first place is because of its pretigious name. People wanted to use ".harvard" behind their email address or ".princeton" So why not host a weekly tourney consisting of top 10 players from each division and these 10 people would play a tourney to win the top place. The winners would move on to the next prestigious division[how you make certain division more prestigious is your decision], so on and so forth. Also you can implement a portrat for winning 50 champions or 100 champions. These will take true dedication and you can truly say oh shit... this guy is good by just looking at the portrait.
On February 14 2011 06:07 Archerofaiur wrote: They will never be able to get away with not adding new units to multiplayer. Units feel bloated and overlapping? Make it work!
That isn't what they said. They said that they WILL add new units, but will also change or remove existing units to get rid of redundancies and other things that aren't fun.
On February 14 2011 06:01 Headshot wrote: Zerg needs a new unit so badly.
Indeed.. Zerg got the least amount of units afaik We at least need a new spell caster and a cloaked unit (something like the lurker).
Roaches + Claws? or Infestor with burrow? are they not cloaked units. Burrow in general makes all your units invisible, even if they cant move.
I don't think i would care if they put more units in. I would hate to see some ridiculous unit come into play. I doubt blizzard would do something like that. New units would be fun but not a necessity.
On February 14 2011 06:05 Zelniq wrote: @dilla Blizzard has repeatedly stated clearly that they are making additions/changes/etc for the multiplayer part of the expansions as well as the new campaigns
Really? I heard Hotls had the campaign story as their first priority. They wernt even sure if they were going to make changes in multiplayer considering the number of issues rising everyday. And considering that this is blizzard etertainment, chances are their not going to balance the game with new units, but make it worse..
They put colosuss in sc2 for god sakes. you think they'll make the game better?
On February 14 2011 05:48 ReTr0[p.S] wrote: I agree with Browder, there would be WAY too many tech choices if a new unit per race is added in every game, it would lead to a game where the winner is not the better player, but the one that had the luck of choosing the right strategy to use.
You play Terran or Protoss right? Zerg needs new units so badly
On February 14 2011 06:01 Headshot wrote: Zerg needs a new unit so badly.
Indeed.. Zerg got the least amount of units afaik We at least need a new spell caster and a cloaked unit (something like the lurker).
Roaches + Claws? or Infestor with burrow? are they not cloaked units. Burrow in general makes all your units invisible, even if they cant move.
I don't think i would care if they put more units in. I would hate to see some ridiculous unit come into play. I doubt blizzard would do something like that. New units would be fun but not a necessity.
except neither of them can attack when underground. that's a pretty major difference from them and the lurker + ghosts + dt's + banshees, etc
(roaches need to unburrow before they attack) (infestors -> infested terrans could be considered an attack, however, that's an mp dump and prob isn't a too good idea compared to using fungal growth.....which you can't use fungal or neural underground.)
so IMO I'd just consider the burrow+claws there as mainly an escape mechanism instead of being "cloak" and being able to attack.
On February 14 2011 06:17 soullogik wrote: if they did something like remove banelings & create a new unit in its place rework old units more than what they normally do (archon/carrier/etc)
i wouldn't care bout new units
They won't ever remove banelings, and why you want them removed confuses me. They're one of the most unique zerg units in SC2.
Oh I'm certain they will add something to the multiplayer in order to sell more copies. There's a lot of people who play SC2 just for the multiplayer and don't care about the campaign.
They don't necessarily need to add new units to make the multiplayer more interesting. Instead, it could come in the form of upgrades. Imagine something like an upgrade at the robo support bay that adds +3 shield armor to immortals. Or imagine a new structure that both emits a pylon power field and recharges shields.
Its so frustrating that SC2 is so god damn one dimensional.
Just give zerg scourage back, we dont need corruptors. we dont need broodlords. their all useuless and take too long, and even if zerg survives up to this point, chances are zerg is going to win without them.
Btw, does anyone know why zerg's units are still 2 supply? You would think zerg should have a unit somewhere in 3 ~ 5 supply somewhere in 2.5 tech so we can match with colosuss ? and 2 supply army of 200 vs 2 supply army of 200 zerg always lose. explanation ? how come? its not that zerg is even mobile, protoss has blink and colosuss can go hop and off, along with charge lots so how is zerg even mobile let alone their units are squishy require upgrades to even be useful and MUST have CREEP rather than giving bonus booost.
SO BROKEN Just focus on wings of liberty, and stop focusing on releasing expansions. stop adding more weight on top of a weak base that you've built blizzard chances are this whole tower your building is going to collapse just becuase theres no strong base to support more weight.
everyone concerned about whether or not zerg will get love should stop worrying. Terran received the most love in Wings of Liberty as naturally terran race received the most attention/thought/creativity just from all the focus on the terran campaign. Now that zerg is getting all the attention I'm sure that will reflect in multiplayer as well
My prediction, especially given that quote from Browder about how they're looking at other ways besides just adding new units to enhance the game, is that they're going to revamp/add upgrades/add abilities to some existing units, making them more interesting or what not. very possibly also adding/changing some new mechanics, possibly a new unique structure or 2 (like the sensor tower). My #1 guess for a unit that will see some changes will be the hydralisk, or maybe that's just my hope. More likely the reaper is a safer bet
Just give zerg scourage back, we dont need corruptors. we dont need broodlords. their all useuless and take too long, and even if zerg survives up to this point, chances are zerg is going to win without them.
I'd trade in scourge for flying zerglings. By which I mean zerglings with an upgrade or something that made them only able to target air (using their wings)-- sort of like corrupter into broodlord.
On February 14 2011 06:17 soullogik wrote: if they did something like remove banelings & create a new unit in its place rework old units more than what they normally do (archon/carrier/etc)
i wouldn't care bout new units
They won't ever remove banelings, and why you want them removed confuses me. They're one of the most unique zerg units in SC2.
I would give up banelings in a heartbeat for lurkers. Banelings are just a poor placeholder for how great the lurker was.
Zerg Combat units: 9. 10 if you consider the Queen a combat unit
Queen Overseer Overlord Drone
You forgot the medivac, its a combat unit in its own right, and part of many compositions, just it because it can carry stuff around on top of being a flying medic doesnt mean it isnt still a flying medic.
Zerg Combat units: 9. 10 if you consider the Queen a combat unit
Queen Overseer Overlord Drone
You forgot the medivac, its a combat unit in its own right, and part of many compositions, just it because it can carry stuff around on top of being a flying medic doesnt mean it isnt still a flying medic.
And don't forget Infested Terran, the damage output of them is terrifying. Base damage is something like 33% higher than a regular Marine and they have the same firing speed.
Edit: On second thoughts Changelings aren't too great as combat units.
Zerg Combat units: 9. 10 if you consider the Queen a combat unit
Queen Overseer Overlord Drone
You forgot the medivac, its a combat unit in its own right, and part of many compositions, just it because it can carry stuff around on top of being a flying medic doesnt mean it isnt still a flying medic.
woul've been quite a waste if they didn't use the units they already implemented. also i don't think many people woul've bought an expansion just for the campaign...
Zerg Combat units: 9. 10 if you consider the Queen a combat unit
Queen Overseer Overlord Drone
You forgot the medivac, its a combat unit in its own right, and part of many compositions, just it because it can carry stuff around on top of being a flying medic doesnt mean it isnt still a flying medic.
And don't forget Changelings and Infested Terran. The damage output of Infested Terran is terrifying. Base damage is something like 33% higher than a regular Marine and they have the same firing speed.
Those are summoned units, kind of different. really we should also then consider auto turrets, PDDs, hallucinations
Zerg Combat units: 9. 10 if you consider the Queen a combat unit
Queen Overseer Overlord Drone
You forgot the medivac, its a combat unit in its own right, and part of many compositions, just it because it can carry stuff around on top of being a flying medic doesnt mean it isnt still a flying medic.
And don't forget Changelings and Infested Terran. The damage output of Infested Terran is terrifying. Base damage is something like 33% higher than a regular Marine and they have the same firing speed.
Those are summoned units, kind of different. really we should also then consider auto turrets, PDDs, hallucinations
OK, how about this. You remove boring crappy dull overused units like the roach, marauder and replace them with exciting units like the lurker or something along those lines.
Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
New units are a necessity for an expansion in my opinion. There's no way I'd pay for the expo without at least 1 for each race, each expansion. They'll figure out how to balance it, that's what they get paid all this money for.
On February 14 2011 06:36 Cain0 wrote: OK, how about this. You remove boring crappy dull overused units like the roach, marauder and replace them with exciting units like the lurker or something along those lines.
Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
I disagree. Roach is my favourite unit. I love how it can burrow, melee attack units in close range, range spit attack and looks awesome!
On February 14 2011 06:22 Zelniq wrote: everyone concerned about whether or not zerg will get love should stop worrying. Terran received the most love in Wings of Liberty as naturally terran race received the most attention/thought/creativity just from all the focus on the terran campaign. Now that zerg is getting all the attention I'm sure that will reflect in multiplayer as well
My prediction, especially given that quote from Browder about how they're looking at other ways besides just adding new units to enhance the game, is that they're going to revamp/add upgrades/add abilities to some existing units, making them more interesting or what not. very possibly also adding/changing some new mechanics, possibly a new unique structure or 2 (like the sensor tower). My #1 guess for a unit that will see some changes will be the hydralisk, or maybe that's just my hope. More likely the reaper is a safer bet
Well, the goal isn't to make another race op. I think Blizz learnt from the fact that their heavy single player focus influenced the multiplayer quite a bit. They should have enough time now to create an even more balanced multiplayer. I think Dustin's statement kinda implies that they are going to implement different amounts of units for each race, that's just a wil guess though.
Btw, thanks for the list of the units, couldn't find a decent one and wasn't able to think of all the units.
On February 14 2011 06:36 Cain0 wrote: OK, how about this. You remove boring crappy dull overused units like the roach, marauder and replace them with exciting units like the lurker or something along those lines.
Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
The developers probably just finished playing COD:MW2
On February 14 2011 06:36 Cain0 wrote: Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
Roach could be good if they made it heal above ground as fast as it heals whiles burrowed. Also, all zerg units should be able to move while burrowed with an upgrade (possibly make that upgrade tier 3).
Geez idk what would happen if people would continue to read the a misquote. Well I do know but it would be ugly
Anyways, do you guys think he means 3 units as in 1 per race or 3 units total I think he probably means 1 per race, 3 total. Although I hope zerg gets at least 1 more unit than the other races over the course of the next 2 expansions, since they have less units.
Yet... no lan?
They don't want an organization like Kespa to "steal control" of the game. Don't underestimate Blizzard, there's always a good reason
In all honesty, only the Zerg really needs any new units. T and P are fine as far as unit count goes.
What I would really want for SC2 would be reworking over many existing units in the game. One major advantage BW has over SC2 I feel is the fact that units used the most in BW often had amazing spectator and micro potential. I have yet to see any Colossus play be even remotely as interesting as Reaver usage, Vultures still manage to be more fun to use and watch than Hellions, Reapers need a complete re-working, Roaches need to be more unique again, and so on.
SC2 units need more micro potential. I noticed this the most in the GTSL finals where I found the PvT matches to be infinitely more exciting when the P player stopped using Colossi. The Colossus is cool looking, but is also an extremely boring unit to use, and I was amazed at how much more I enjoyed the games when the maps were bigger and people stopped using boring units.
Couple new Z units, better maps, better Bnet, reworked existing units. HotS will be a solid expansion if it manages to do all that.
Look at SC;BW to SC2 progression. There are many units deleted, switched weapons and roles and changes specific on the battlefield. There can be not only new units, we can have new zerglings, that will slowdown enemy units, and new melee unit, that will damage them, but more better, than zergling damage. It's as example.
They can split 2 units into one or 1 unit into 2 units, but more good in their role
I hope they have more units to add a bit of depth to the multiplayer. Zerg especially feels lacking. They should bring back lurkers. Those were sweet.
Also, if they brought back vessels I would switch to Terran. That is by far my favourite unit in the SC universe. I go for a ton of vessels in the SC2 campaign and they just slaughter zerg with irradiate and you can make a wall of Thors with one vessel per Thor and be invincible. They were so awesome in SC1. I couldn't see them bringing the arbiter back for Protoss as the mothership kinda covers that role. It would be sweet if they brought back the dragoon. Those things were so cool even though they seemed to not be able to do anything right.
On February 14 2011 06:36 Cain0 wrote: Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
Roach could be good if they made it heal above ground as fast as it heals whiles burrowed. Also, all zerg units should be able to move while burrowed with an upgrade (possibly make that upgrade tier 3).
You can, with a straight face, tell me that those changes wouldn't break the game?
I'm no pro or game designer, but I'm hoping/expecting to see some HT/DT fusion that would create something else then Archon. Like a hybrid archon. If the unit was actually good, wouldn't it increase the usage of HT and DT instead of always going collosi? I personally really like this idea, of having a Archon, a Dark Archon and a Hybrid Archon or whatever you want to call it. Blizzard! take this idea please! (here comes the flaming)
No new units??? That's sad. Just out the top of my head stuff that could work:
Zerg: - Lurker (fan favorite) - Any sort of ground siege/long range unit: think of a Baneling Launcher... - Air Spellcaster (like the old Queen with some extra utility in there) - Scourge can still work
Protoss - Arbiter: oh and scrap the Mothershit please. (Vortex is overpowered and ridiculous and Mass recall doesnt fit on such a slow unit)
I don't know if anyone knows this, but when the expansion comes out will there be two separate ladders? Will you have to choose which version of starcraft you want and have a reset achievement score? I know achievements don't matter to most people but it will make me really sad if all my AI achievements that I grinded for hours to get are irrelevant in the new expansion.
Im glad. I hope they add new units that are needed or bring something positive to the game and not add units for the sake of adding units in expansions.
I hope blizzard is very careful about how they add units. For one, I agree that the game would be just too "bloated" by adding 6 more units to the game (3 races per expansion).
I hope they do something like remove units that don't add to interesting gameplay (i.e. remove reaper, remove warp prism, remove curruptor) and replace them with more interesting units. Of course they would have to do this very carefully as to not destroy the game's balance
I found the comments regarding bringing back the WC3 daily tournament-style events interesting. That was one of the best things about BNet 1.0 for my friends and me.
On February 14 2011 06:36 Cain0 wrote: Seriously, who thought of the roach please? Everything about it is boring as hell.
Roach could be good if they made it heal above ground as fast as it heals whiles burrowed. Also, all zerg units should be able to move while burrowed with an upgrade (possibly make that upgrade tier 3).
You can, with a straight face, tell me that those changes wouldn't break the game?
Considering his blatent miss-quote in the OP, im guessing he is a troll. But if he isn't, the roach could heal just as fast above ground in the alpha/early beta and it was clearly broken (if i recall).
Reminds me of broodwar, few fixes came from upgrades, not units. Goliath boosters, ultra speed+armor come to mind. Sure corsairs/valks/medics are what stopped mutas, but these upgrades filled other holes in the balance.
On February 14 2011 07:03 XKiller wrote: So are the next two games going to be "Expansions" as in you need WoL to play HotS?
I can't find the source but i know blizzard said that you have to get WoL to play HotS in multiplayer, if you want to play only single you wont need both game
On February 14 2011 06:58 hackmed wrote: You can, with a straight face, tell me that those changes wouldn't break the game?
On February 14 2011 06:46 FrostOtter wrote: Considering his blatent miss-quote in the OP, im guessing he is a troll. But if he isn't, the roach could heal just as fast above ground in the alpha/early beta and it was clearly broken (if i recall).
Making the roach heal at the same rate above ground and below would be fine. You just need to tweak their damage, range, move speed, health, and armor. Then, you have a unique unit ... one that can will heal itself quickly, rather than the boring unit it is now.
On February 14 2011 07:03 XKiller wrote: So are the next two games going to be "Expansions" as in you need WoL to play HotS?
I can't find the source but i know blizzard said that you have to get WoL to play HotS in multiplayer, if you want to play only single you wont need both game
Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
On February 14 2011 07:09 TedJustice wrote: Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
Well, considering after there's detection out they're basically shitty Zealots, I propose..
On February 14 2011 07:09 TedJustice wrote: Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
This is what I was thinking too.. remember brood war added a few upgrades to existing units to stop them from becoming obsolete in the face of new units. Remember goliath range and ultralisk upgrades? I
On February 14 2011 06:46 FrostOtter wrote: Considering his blatent miss-quote in the OP, im guessing he is a troll. But if he isn't, the roach could heal just as fast above ground in the alpha/early beta and it was clearly broken (if i recall).
Making the roach heal at the same rate above ground and below would be fine. You just need to tweak their damage, range, move speed, health, and armor. Then, you have a unique unit ... one that can will heal itself quickly, rather than the boring unit it is now.
How is it boring? That's just like throwing out that zealots are boring...you are just saying it is so, without any reason or explanation.
On February 14 2011 06:59 BatCat wrote: I want new units T_T like vultures, lurkers and darchons. thad's be cool I think.
Its funny how people dont seem to see the contradiction in something like that. If they were to bring back lurkers, vessels, vultures, or whatever other BW unit, since they would be bringing it back, it wouldnt be a new unit. And also, quite honestly, that would never happen (bringing back the old units) If their marketing scheme for WoL was just "Hey! we removed all the new units, and added back all of the old BW units into the game! Now its just BW with shiny graphics, and a different engine, enjoy!", then that wouldnt work, obviously. Nostalgia is nice, but if all you want is for SC2 to be BW, then you should probably play BW instead.
On February 14 2011 07:09 TedJustice wrote: Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
Well, considering after there's detection out they're basically shitty Zealots, I propose..
HOVERBOARDS.
Shitty zealots? They are super expensive super awesome zealots! Any toss lategame army should be replkacing zealots with DTs progressively, their sheer dps when massed, with some units behind makes them incredibly scary.
How about hybrids of the main teams, like in Generals Zero hour, that way you could loose unit and gain advanges with other, like a warp gate protoss no tanks etc. just warp prisims and harder infrantry, or will this complicate the professional league and ladder balances? Just a thought please dont flame
On February 14 2011 07:09 TedJustice wrote: Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
Well, considering after there's detection out they're basically shitty Zealots, I propose..
HOVERBOARDS.
Shitty zealots? They are super expensive super awesome zealots! Any toss lategame army should be replkacing zealots with DTs progressively, their sheer dps when massed, with some units behind makes them incredibly scary.
That would be true, if it weren't for the fact that DTs are quite slow and extremely fragile. If you try running 10 DTs (instead of ~25-30 Zealots) into a late-game MMM ball with detection, it will make you cry. Zealots can remain relevant in the late game because of Charge and their awesome HP for cost, DTs have neither of those things. It's just impossible to keep them alive for long enough to take advantage of their DPS if your opponent has detection in place.
i dont see at all why this is a thread. it makes more than enough senses that 3 units for each race added to the game would be far too many. its unlikely that they would remove a unit, that would be ridiculous in terms of balance and consistency.
Well just because they don't add units isn't the worst thing ever. If you remember, Brood War added some key upgrades that made existing units even more useful (Goliath Range, Ultralisk Armor).
On February 14 2011 07:29 Tump wrote: Well just because they don't add units isn't the worst thing ever. If you remember, Brood War added some key upgrades that made existing units even more useful (Goliath Range, Ultralisk Armor).
Reaper mines, anyone?
That would actually be pretty cool.
Honestly, right now I just want Blizz to experiment with the supply cap, or give supply cap options etc.
I dont think 1 unit/expansion sounds like too much, or would lead to a too "bloated" game.
BW introduced 2 for T/Z and 3 for P.
WC3:TFT introduced 2 units for all races.
If they can come up with other improvements its fine by me. But I still think each race will still be getting at least 1 new unit eventually, probably 2.
On February 14 2011 07:09 TedJustice wrote: Could be some new upgrades. I'd be okay with that. Something to research at the Dark Shrine would be nice so it isn't just a giant sign saying "hey, I'm going DT's, look at my waving phallus"
Well, considering after there's detection out they're basically shitty Zealots, I propose..
HOVERBOARDS.
Shitty zealots? They are super expensive super awesome zealots! Any toss lategame army should be replkacing zealots with DTs progressively, their sheer dps when massed, with some units behind makes them incredibly scary.
That would be true, if it weren't for the fact that DTs are quite slow and extremely fragile. If you try running 10 DTs (instead of ~25-30 Zealots) into a late-game MMM ball with detection, it will make you cry. Zealots can remain relevant in the late game because of Charge and their awesome HP for cost, DTs have neither of those things. It's just impossible to keep them alive for long enough to take advantage of their DPS if your opponent has detection in place.
If you try to compare 10 DTs to 30 zealots, then yeah, they are less than optimal. But 30 DTs take up exactly as much food in a 200/200 army as 30 zealots. And if you have 30 DTs in your army, even if he has detection, its quite scary compared to 30 zealots. At 3/3 for example, it takes a zealot 50 hits to kill an ultralisk, and he can tank 9 hits. A DT on the other hand, kills an ultralisk in 9 hits and dies in 8 hits. So sure enough, the zealot tanks a little bit better, but Id rather face them any day than equal numbers of DTs that do 60 damage per hit
They should think of making some units that are underused more used. For instance, an overseer upgrade might be nice (to make it start with more energy for contaminate or something). Queen and hydra speed off creep would be nice (with a bigger speed bonus on creep). Zergling wings would be nice (for going down tiers but not up tiers) as they might increase the use of nydus on maps with cliffs, and lead to better surrounds.
I'm pretty fine with this, in fact I hoped it would turn out this way (without groundbreaking changes and new units).
Unlike SC1, competitive SC2 scene developed pretty much at release day (even since beta actually), and it would be annoying for people to have to re-learn the game with every expansion. It needs to stabilize and strategies need to be given enough time to evolve properly.
On February 14 2011 06:02 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote: Oh man can someone give that OP a warning?
He obviously left out the "just" on purpose in order to get some attention for his thread. That's pathetic.
I was like "can't imagine that going to happen". Checked the Interview and yep. He misquoted. Weird how you can copy past the whole paragraph but somehow, someway a word goes loose
I fixed your quote and left the "just" out, im sure you didnt mean that. I mean, its not like you wrote it or anything.
On topic: I think they left it open deliberately. He wants to say they dont want to be constrained by some arbitrary restriction. All he has said is that they are not just adding 1 unit per race
On February 14 2011 05:59 willoc wrote: Upgrades could replace new units as well. For example:
Archon upgrade that allows them to charge like a Void Ray. When fully charged their AOE is increased in radius.
Queen upgrade: allows dark swarm to be cast.
Etc.
Do you realize why things like dark swarm were removed? Because with smart-casting, they are completely ridiculous. Spells all have to be weakened now.
1 new unit per race per expansion isn't going to be that taxing on gaming balance, Broodwar introduced 2 new units per race, 3 in the case of Protoss. They should at least provide Terran and Zerg their own "Super" Unit over the course of the next two expansions.
Additionally, none of the new units from broodwar required a new building, but rather an altered tech path for terran and zerg units (Protoss teching did not get altered at all).
Valkyries were Stargate + Armory (A requirement combo not present in SCII presently btw), Lurker was Hydra Den + Lair + Research. Medics shared tech paths with firebats and Devourer shared tech requirements with Guardians. DT's and Dark Archons had the same requirements as HTs and Archons, and Corsairs were stargate only.
i hope the new units helps balance races so that maps aren't such a big factor. wouldn't it be cool if zerg got a unit that made it really competitive on close spawn metal/steppes?
might not be easy/possible though.
people are looking too deeply into the # of units per expansion and making all sorts of comparisons that aren't necessarily valid. although i agree zero units in an expansion would be pretty disappointing, unless current units get some cool new abilities.
On February 14 2011 05:48 ReTr0[p.S] wrote: I agree with Browder, there would be WAY too many tech choices if a new unit per race is added in every game, it would lead to a game where the winner is not the better player, but the one that had the luck of choosing the right strategy to use.
isnt that what the game boils down to now?
But from the way it looks, get used to seeing the same strategies every game in every expansion
Honestly I could see a Lurker having a Tier3 upgrade at Hive tech to move while burrowed. I thought about what Dustin said about the lurker and baneling overlapping I just don't see it like that. It's like saying the Templar and Collosus overlap because they both are good at AOE, its just that there are different ways the other races deal with Templars and deal with collosus. Dustin also said the lurker just halted the game against the other races at its tier2 tech level. Causing the races to turtle until detection I could agree with this but seeing how fast protoss and terrans can do either 1/1/1 builds and how cheap the observer is currently it shouldnt be that much of a problem and if you add in the cost of what lurker could cost alot of gas guessing it would cost around 100 gas to morph from a roach or hydra its not like there would be 50 of them on the field. Anyways enough of the lurker. I don't see the metagame changing too much from its current state without new units. To me new units should represent style preferences in gameplay such as the lurker and baneling example, where if players prefer banelings or if they prefer lurkers both doing the same thing basically and being dealt with in slightly different ways its up to the player which they like better. Similar to collosus and high templar, both good for protoss at dealing with mass amounts of units but they have different counters from the other races. I could see adding new spells and abilities to other units being a good idea, such as adding a shield regeneration spell to the high templar which there is Hero unit in the campaign that has this ability already. If they don't add new units which I still hope they do, they should add new abilities atleast. Overall I'd be dissapointed with no new units.
On February 14 2011 06:58 hackmed wrote: You can, with a straight face, tell me that those changes wouldn't break the game?
On February 14 2011 06:46 FrostOtter wrote: Considering his blatent miss-quote in the OP, im guessing he is a troll. But if he isn't, the roach could heal just as fast above ground in the alpha/early beta and it was clearly broken (if i recall).
Making the roach heal at the same rate above ground and below would be fine. You just need to tweak their damage, range, move speed, health, and armor. Then, you have a unique unit ... one that can will heal itself quickly, rather than the boring unit it is now.
How is it boring? That's just like throwing out that zealots are boring...you are just saying it is so, without any reason or explanation.
How is it boring??? Seriously??? It has a short range, it is unmicroable, it has thick armour and high health. ITS A MEATSHEILD. Zealot in unique because it is the only melee unit protoss has, however, im pretty sure that a zerg player could survive just aswell with a unique unit in place of the roach. What im trying to say is if remove the zealot, protoss cannot defend from cheese or very early pressure. Remove the roach on the other hand and and add in a lurker and you have an interesting game.
Note: I pretty much feel the same way about the marauder.
Interesting.. I agree they shouldnt feel obligated to add units x per race etc, "just 'cuz", but I hope they dont rule it out completely. And if they were to add units, the expac would be a good time to do it.
I am very of interested how they pull off the expansion. They obviously dont want to totally alter the game, but need to make it enough of a change to be compelling to get. (eg if it was just new missions, I can see alot of people skipping it.) That's why I was pretty surprised they had a predetermined number of expansions,
They should add new units per race. I think the community would understand if they took time in making the new expansion if they added new units and new upgrades and new macro mechanics for each race
Funny how a lot of people are saying that 2 units per race are not a big deal on game balance, because Brood War introduced 2 or 3 per race. They seem to neglect that BW had a HUGE impact on the game balance, the balance of vanilla and BW isn't even comparable imo.
I'd be fine if they don't add any units at all, maybe they could make certain tech pathes more versatile and interesting (for example do something about Zerg Hydra-tech, give terran mech proper AA, or make DT tech more charming in some way), but if they add units they should only fill some niche roles and even there they should be very careful in how to introduce them. It could make the game more interesting, but it could also go horribly wrong and destroy balance.
It has a short range, it is unmicroable, it has thick armour and high health. ITS A MEATSHEILD.
Um, it also regens quickly underground. And can move while burrowed. There's plenty of micro that you could do with it; Zerg players simply don't.
What im trying to say is if remove the zealot, protoss cannot defend from cheese or very early pressure. Remove the roach on the other hand and and add in a lurker and you have an interesting game.
Removing the Zealot is different from replacing the Roach with the Lurker. Removing the Zealot only takes away from the Protoss. Replacing a unit with a different unit changes things; you lose some thing but gain others.
Assuming that the Lurker you're replacing the Roach with would be a full replacement (Tier 1.5, Lurker Den, built from Larva rather than Hydralisks), are you really saying that you want a Tier 1.5 burrowing unit? And if you're replacing the Tier 1.5 Roach with a Tier 2.5 Lurker, then what exactly are the Zerg supposed to do until then? There are unit compositions against which the Zerg need Roaches. And they will face those compositions well before Tier 2.5 Lurkers could come out.
However "boring" you may find the Roach, it is a vital component of the Zerg. You can't replace it with something unless you also add something that can handle the particular needs that the Roach currently fills.
Honestly though, 1 unit per race per expansion is just two new units per race total. I can definitely imagine zerg with two more combat units and I'm not sure they'll feel bloated then. Terran already has something like this where a unit as the Thor fills the role of multiple other units and it could be removed without too many problems; it is still a distinct unit with its own style of play and I think people would be sad if it was removed though. Obviously, when designing you should never be happy with units that just copy other units, but on the other hand: multiple units with the same role allow the player to choose which one is best for this situation, which can be good design.
On February 14 2011 06:58 hackmed wrote: You can, with a straight face, tell me that those changes wouldn't break the game?
On February 14 2011 06:46 FrostOtter wrote: Considering his blatent miss-quote in the OP, im guessing he is a troll. But if he isn't, the roach could heal just as fast above ground in the alpha/early beta and it was clearly broken (if i recall).
Making the roach heal at the same rate above ground and below would be fine. You just need to tweak their damage, range, move speed, health, and armor. Then, you have a unique unit ... one that can will heal itself quickly, rather than the boring unit it is now.
How is it boring? That's just like throwing out that zealots are boring...you are just saying it is so, without any reason or explanation.
How is it boring??? Seriously??? It has a short range, it is unmicroable, it has thick armour and high health. ITS A MEATSHEILD. Zealot in unique because it is the only melee unit protoss has, however, im pretty sure that a zerg player could survive just aswell with a unique unit in place of the roach. What im trying to say is if remove the zealot, protoss cannot defend from cheese or very early pressure. Remove the roach on the other hand and and add in a lurker and you have an interesting game.
Note: I pretty much feel the same way about the marauder.
A little overlap isnt a bad thing as long as they are different enough. Aka Thors and Goliaths if you had them both they would overlap heavily but gols would still be alot more massable. I want to see a new mech unit for terran personally and a harassment unit for toss and for zergs a AoE unit like lurker
hmm should this thread be closed, clearly a lot of people are skimming the OP and giving their opinions on what a bad idea expansions w/o new units would be. creating a lot of confusion in the process
On February 14 2011 08:21 Boblion wrote: Remove the colossus and add the reaver please.
this pretty much.
worst unit in sc2.
overall i dont quite understand them. no matter what and how many units they change. balance will completly change(unless the new units are something like the reaper). thats expected and necessary. yes that will throw up evrything esports wise but thats what addons do. also its the only situation where you can change and add aton where no one can bitch much about the possibly bad effect on balance.
they should add atleast 1 unit/race AND change aton of the existing ones./ their mechanics to make the game more fun. esp zerg with their very limited arsenal should get more then that.
also they were talking about 2-3 units /expansions/race before. i remember interviews where they said " oh yah we mostly went for less units now cause we dont want to have too many after we add 2-3 per race each expansion".
On February 14 2011 08:21 Boblion wrote: Remove the colossus and add the reaver please.
this pretty much.
worst unit in sc2.
overall i dont quite understand them. no matter what and how many units they change. balance will completly change(unless the new units are something like the reaper). thats expected and necessary. yes that will throw up evrything esports wise but thats what addons do. also its the only situation where you can change and add aton where no one can bitch much about the possibly bad effect on balance.
they should add atleast 1 unit/race AND change aton of the existing ones./ their mechanics to make the game more fun. esp zerg with their very limited arsenal should get more then that.
also they were talking about 2-3 units /expansions/race before. i remember interviews where they said " oh yah we mostly went for less units now cause we dont want to have too many after we add 2-3 per race each expansion".
You know, I think this could fix a ton of the shit we see in every P matchup.
If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
On February 14 2011 06:55 Resilient wrote: I found the comments regarding bringing back the WC3 daily tournament-style events interesting. That was one of the best things about BNet 1.0 for my friends and me.
i totally agree, we need these. i think enhancing b.net would actually be more important than adding new units. in fact, the more i think about it, the more i think they're holding this back deliberately as a expansion feature.
before beta, i remember thinking "why doesn't SC2 have as many units as BW?", but really i think the set we have is so well designed that you would risk dead weight or overlapping roles. remove marauders and put in firebats (nobody else managed to turn this into a balance whine, so I had to ). Seriously though ... i would LOVE lurkers back.
edit: not a chance in hell of heroes. if anybody really believes that... they need to stop believin....
On February 14 2011 08:43 jmack wrote: If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
Oh god I'd prefer this so much if it meant I didn't have to endorse their DIRE story writing.
On February 14 2011 08:43 jmack wrote: If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
Oh god I'd prefer this so much if it meant I didn't have to endorse their DIRE story writing.
a) I think u need to look up the definition of dire...... b) this not a single player qq story thread. I happen to enjoy the campaign as well as the multiplayer. We all got that friend IRL that hates everything to be cool, you guys are them. I am excited to the continuation of the story. So go to the actual qq threads plz.
On February 14 2011 08:43 jmack wrote: If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
Oh god I'd prefer this so much if it meant I didn't have to endorse their DIRE story writing.
a) I think u need to look up the definition of dire...... b) this not a single player qq story thread. I happen to enjoy the campaign as well as the multiplayer. We all got that friend IRL that hates everything to be cool, you guys are them. I am excited to the continuation of the story. So go to the actual qq threads plz.
On February 14 2011 08:43 jmack wrote: If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
Oh god I'd prefer this so much if it meant I didn't have to endorse their DIRE story writing.
a) I think u need to look up the definition of dire...... b) this not a single player qq story thread. I happen to enjoy the campaign as well as the multiplayer. We all got that friend IRL that hates everything to be cool, you guys are them. I am excited to the continuation of the story. So go to the actual qq threads plz.
On February 14 2011 08:43 jmack wrote: If there's no new units added to multi player, then there's no reason to further divide the servers for those who have the expansion and those who don't. MP wouldn't change.
Therefore, if not receiving new units means I can not buy the two overpriced expansions and still play SC2 then so be it.
Oh god I'd prefer this so much if it meant I didn't have to endorse their DIRE story writing.
a) I think u need to look up the definition of dire...... b) this not a single player qq story thread. I happen to enjoy the campaign as well as the multiplayer. We all got that friend IRL that hates everything to be cool, you guys are them. I am excited to the continuation of the story. So go to the actual qq threads plz.
I think people need to remember the mod edit and maybe mods should also change the quote since the OP got it completely wrong.
The idea is its not JUST adding new units that they want to do but to add new units brings the CHALLENGE of making sure no other units become useless because two units do the same thing.
They will figure something out I am sure so everybody relax :/
On February 14 2011 08:21 Boblion wrote: Remove the colossus and add the reaver please.
I'm with you on this one.
Collusi are the stupidest units ever.
They are made in all match ups because of how retardedly strong they are. They make for the most uninteresting games, A+Click unit with micro ability ect.
the reaver was exciting. Even when it was in a shuttle, and scourges were chasing after it. Made for so much better gameplay.
On February 14 2011 09:04 ZeromuS wrote: I think people need to remember the mod edit and maybe mods should also change the quote since the OP got it completely wrong.
The idea is its not JUST adding new units that they want to do but to add new units brings the CHALLENGE of making sure no other units become useless because two units do the same thing.
They will figure something out I am sure so everybody relax :/
Or, you know, people could actually read the OP instead of just auto running to blizzard hate. OMG THEY ARENT ADDING NEW UNITS BLIZZ CORPORATION MAKING PROFITS LOLOL
Or, you know, you could interpret what he meant properly.
In BW they added an air unit and a ground unit for each race. In TFT they added a hero, a ground unit and an air unit for each race. I think he's just saying they don't want to do that again, and might add two new ground units for zerg, a new air unit for terran and nothing strictly new for protoss but repurpose an existing unit like the mothership and add some new abilities.
If the metagame evolves in such a way that you NEED new units to fix whatever's wrong with the metagame, then they'll probably reconsider. Kinda like how before Brood War, mutas were fucking bullshit so every race got new units to deal with mutas.
If they aren't adding any new units then I don't want to have to pay for an expansion to continue to enjoy battle.net. The whole POINT of new expansion is to play multiplayer with new or improved units...
Most people have seen the unit variations breakdown between the races. Zerg have far less combat unit choices than the other two races, and if things stay that way for Heart of the Swarm then I don't see the point of buying it. I don't like seeing that the lead developer considers an obviously unfinished race to be in danger of overlapping unit roles. That's a terrible excuse, but then again they think that banelings overlap with lurkers so I shouldn't be surprised.
Edit: Uhhh Browder mentioned a fear of unit bloat, so please explain how he can reconcile adding new units to both expansions while avoiding this alleged bloat? I'm not convinced that new units are going to be added from what I read...
On February 14 2011 09:26 SolidusR wrote: If they aren't adding any new units then I don't want to have to pay for an expansion to continue to enjoy battle.net. The whole POINT of new expansion is to play multiplayer with new or improved units...
No, the whole point of a new expansions for a whole new campaign. That's the way expansions have been since the dawn of PC gaming.
That's a nice opinion, but I disagree with it. Expansions mean different things to different people, and in case you hadn't noticed this is a multi-player discussion I couldn't care less about the continuation of the crappy story.
On February 14 2011 05:48 ReTr0[p.S] wrote: I agree with Browder, there would be WAY too many tech choices if a new unit per race is added in every game, it would lead to a game where the winner is not the better player, but the one that had the luck of choosing the right strategy to use.
That's not true. And while keeping the unit count small is good for simplicity, its also bad for strategy. The whole dice roll problem is because of bad unit design, not because of how many units there are.
Broodwar added 7 new units, quite a few seemingly overpowered units at that (lurker, medic, DT) and it did wonders for the game.
If it wasn't for these 7 new units we wouldn't have the bisu build, or the fantasy build, and boxers crazy micro.
Bring in the Spectre for Terran, Defiler for Zerg and Arbiter for Protoss, add those units back into the game, we'd get some interesting end game strategies for sure.
Spectre should be T3, you need a Science Facility to make one out of a tech lab barracks. Remove fusion core requirement for Battle Cruiser and make Science Facility the requirement to unlock spectres and BC's. Spectre would be like the late game ghost of SC:BW and have Lockdown ability. I'm sure other unique abilities could be invented for this unit, rather than using the abilities in campaign which wouldn't be balanced in Multiplayer.
Defiler for zerg would be just like in BW but remove consume and plague ability, that would make it too strong in SC2. A T3 caster that can use Dark Swarm, make DS have different properties from BW, maybe in the cloud all units take less damage? It would be like a guardian shield to help your ultras get to the front lines without dying immediately. Or make DS as an ability that purely counters tanks, and doesn't allow siege tanks to fire within a radius of DS. I'm sure other cool abilities could be brought in for the Defiler, like bring back Infesting buildings, allow Defilers to infest Command Centers, Nexus and even enemy hatcheries! I'm not sure what purpose these infested buildings would serve but I'm sure something could be figured out by blizzard. Maybe give defiler the queens old abilities from BW?
Arbiter would be a cool unit to see, we have the mothership but you only get one per game! I think this unit would be super cool to see return, either that or Dark Archon or Reaver but I'm not sure how that could balance out.
I'd also love to see Goliaths for Terran and lurkers for zerg, dunno about protoss tho.
On February 14 2011 06:50 okrane wrote: No new units??? That's sad. Just out the top of my head stuff that could work:
Zerg: - Lurker (fan favorite) - Any sort of ground siege/long range unit: think of a Baneling Launcher... - Air Spellcaster (like the old Queen with some extra utility in there) - Scourge can still work
Protoss - Arbiter: oh and scrap the Mothershit please. (Vortex is overpowered and ridiculous and Mass recall doesnt fit on such a slow unit)
Terran: - Something for better map presence
I cant lie if they scrapped the mothership i would probably lose all hope in SC2. The arbiter was awesome, i miss my statis fields but Vortex i would take any day.
The second answer was probably relating to the campaign, as all the StarCraft 1 Terran units were in the SC2 terran campaign, so I expect to see the SC1 zerg units in HotS (dunno what they'll do about the queen, though...)
I think what people are forgetting is that Starcraft 1 was super heavily imbalanced before broodwar came out. I mean, come on. Can you imagine playing as zerg with zero lurkers in BW? It would make every matchup (except ZvZ obv) a nightmare. BW's new units were necessary to balance the game and make it playable at high levels. Since such an effort has already been made to balance SC2, I can see how the prospect of adding an additional unit to each race while maintaining balance is a daunting idea to the developers. If they were forced to add them, they would have to be mostly useless units that fulfill some niche role (like the valkyrie or the devourer). This would be fine, but as Dustin Browder said, it would be hard to do this without stepping on another units toes.
Zerg is missing scourge sooo bad, I don't know why they appear in the campaign only, just imagine how less effective terran drops would be if you had banelings in the heavens patroling around your base bw style... Zerg also needs a midgame siege unit, I don't understand what was Blizzard's reasoning when they decided to make zerg the underranged race when clearly the ranged unit always has the advantage of the melee unit ...
Can you imagine playing as zerg with zero lurkers in BW? It would make every matchup (except ZvZ obv) a nightmare.
Actually, it'd be great for Zerg. No corsairs. No Valks. No medics. Sure, Zergs would go Muta-ling all the time, but they'd be pretty strong overall.
Zerg is missing scourge sooo bad, I don't know why they appear in the campaign only, just imagine how less effective terran drops would be if you had banelings in the heavens patroling around your base bw style...
On February 14 2011 09:48 TheBlueMeaner wrote: Zerg is missing scourge sooo bad, I don't know why they appear in the campaign only, just imagine how less effective terran drops would be if you had banelings in the heavens patroling around your base bw style... Zerg also needs a midgame siege unit, I don't understand what was Blizzard's reasoning when they decided to make zerg the underranged race when clearly the ranged unit always has the advantage of the melee unit ...
The same was true of zerg in BW (no midgame siege unit), are you saying that BW is imbalanced? And don't say that the lurker was a siege unit, since both reavers and tanks outranged lurkers, and bunkers (with marine range upgrade) were equal in range.
I'm sure they will throw in a few upgrades in addition to new units. Brood War gave the Goliath a range upgrade that made it a dominant anti-air unit. Considering that the Fleet Beacon went from a treasure trove of upgrades in BW to only having a paltry one upgrade in SC2, I have a feeling that Blizzard might add something to make it a more viable building. Also, I heard a rumor that the Dark Shrine might be getting an upgrade, though it is a very, very shady rumor.
I really hope Blizzard adds some units to completely flesh out the Zerg, since right now it feels like there are significant holes in the Zerg unit composition with the removal of Lurkers and Defilers. IMO, Zerg really need a mid-game siege unit, a unit that can attack while burrowed, and a late-game spellcaster.
I think they are referring to keeping roughly the same number of units overall so that any role overlaps are minimized. I'm sure we will see some new stuff. It's just not necessarily going to be the addition of 1-2 units over the next couple expansions. Maybe they will try and make units which are relatively unused different or replace them with something else or add some interesting upgrades which change the dynamic of certain units. I would love to trade my useless carriers for something more interesting, or see some new zerg units. I trust that DB isn't going to allow anything completely retarded to happen, I mean so far blizzard has been pretty good about balance.
Wr3k, that's a really good theory. Right now, reapers are pretty underused, so adding in new abilities or even replacing the unit is probably what's going to happen.
On February 14 2011 09:48 TheBlueMeaner wrote: Zerg is missing scourge sooo bad, I don't know why they appear in the campaign only, just imagine how less effective terran drops would be if you had banelings in the heavens patroling around your base bw style... Zerg also needs a midgame siege unit, I don't understand what was Blizzard's reasoning when they decided to make zerg the underranged race when clearly the ranged unit always has the advantage of the melee unit ...
The same was true of zerg in BW (no midgame siege unit), are you saying that BW is imbalanced? And don't say that the lurker was a siege unit, since both reavers and tanks outranged lurkers, and bunkers (with marine range upgrade) were equal in range.
the lurker was a siege unit. range doesnt come into the equation when you talk about a seige unit. A siege unit is something that sits in one place and blocks enemy units from crossing through the section they are guarding(controlling space and where battles happen which is essential for zerg). There are some exceptions but from the litteral definition of the word a lurker is a siege unit
A siege unit is something that sits in one place and blocks enemy units from crossing through the section they are guarding(controlling space and where battles happen which is essential for zerg). There are some exceptions but from the litteral definition of the word a lurker is a siege unit
No. No it isn't. The "litteral" definition of the word "Siege" focuses on attacking a place. A fortified position. They are the opposite of territory defense; "siege" always means attack.
The Terrans get territory defense and siege in one package. And you're right that it would be nice for the Zerg to have some unit that can hold territory. But that unit does not have to be a "siege unit."
On February 14 2011 10:35 stroggos wrote: No new units? this is blizzards way of admitting that starcraft brood war was already a perfect game and that sc2 is just a graphical/ui update.
EPT
.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/m3uLA.jpg)
