|
Now, I'm aware that this is a complete pipedream and will never happen, but I'm curious as to what would be the effects of adding a new race to the game, and want to start a discussion about this idea.
It seems to me it would actually do a lot of good for the game, as it would increase diversity in the races we see in game, as well as the number of strategies that could be used through out. It creates 4 new matchups in the game. This would be amazing to see in my opinion, and would do wonders in increasing interest in the SC2. Old players would come back just to try it out, and new players would have more options to play around and experiment with when they're just getting into it. Warcraft 3 had 4 races, so why couldn't SC2?
Of course, there'd be the problems of increased balance issues and difficulty in map making, but those are probably problems that could be worked around and dealt with. It'd also be difficult to get pros interested in playing the new race, as race switching among pros is very rare, so it may be under represented at the top level, but that's not a huge deal really.
An obvious choice for such a new race would be the Xel'naga, an already existing race withing the Starcraft Universe, and with defined characteristics and assests. Perhaps they'd be too similar to the protoss, but there's a lot of way in which you can differentiate the two.
What's TL's opinion on this matter? Could this be a realistic way of increasing the diversity and interest in the game, or is it just going to cause more problems? Would you all be willing to learn another race?
Poll: New race in SC2?Bad idea, would have negetive effects. (250) 41% Good Idea, would like to see it. (169) 28% Interesting, but too difficult to do. (163) 27% Would have to see, unsure. (22) 4% 604 total votes Your vote: New race in SC2? (Vote): Good Idea, would like to see it.
(Vote): Interesting, but too difficult to do.
(Vote): Bad idea, would have negetive effects.
(Vote): Would have to see, unsure.
Alternatively, the idea of "factions" of each race has come up. Examples could include something along the lines of
-Confederate Terran and Rebel Terran
-Auir Protoss and Shakuras Protoss
-Primal Zerg and Kerrigan's Zerg
The factions would be essentially similar but with minor differences and perhaps a couple unique units. This would be a lot simpler to design and impliment as a lot of the pieces to make this a reality are already in place. We could add in more units without overloading each race. This actually I think is a better idea than a 4th race.
|
It'd be even harder for newer players to get into SC. Knowing enough build orders for 3 matchups with 5+ maps is already a struggle, adding another race just makes it worse. They're already having trouble balancing 3 races, 4 would probably just create more balance whine which is the last thing SC needs.
|
It's difficult enough balancing 3 races in this game. Adding a 4th and yea that's it your done.
|
They'd have to come up with some very fresh ideas on how to make the race feel completely different from each of the other races. The beauty of Starcraft is how each faction feels truly unique from the others, so they'd have a high standard to uphold. But yes, I'd be very much enthused to play Starcraft with 4 factions. I could probably tolerate as many as 8. In CnC Mashup, the 5 faction are a lot of fun, but they certainly don't feel terribly unique from each other. Even that one crazy mod that added another 2 or 3 factions didn't manage to attain the level of variety in their total game as Starcraft has in just 3 factions. So it's an idea that I adore, but I'd need to see some extremely promising concepts demoed before I'd gain any confidence in it.
Fun fact: the UED was discussed and planned as a 4th race early in BW's development, before more conservative minds prevailed and we ended up with the game we knew and loved for 11 years.
|
Earliest it can be considered is 5-odd years from now when they start developing SC3 (you know it'll happen).
|
On March 16 2015 14:48 ROOTiaguz wrote:
It's difficult enough balancing 3 races in this game. Adding a 4th and yea that's it your done.
I don't know, is the balance in this game so bad right now that adding a 4th would be impossible? It would certainly create more issues, but those issues would also come up less frequently as you'd be playing against those issues and races less.
|
I played ALOT of Dawn of War, RTS with much more races than SC2 (nine I think).
I cant say the developers cared that much about patching and balacing at the end, but when it becomes to many races it is impossible do balance every race vs each other.
I think it probably can be done with four races. Perhaps not perfect. But surely done.
However, Blizzard is probably one of the slowest organisations excisting when it comes to patching the game, coming up with new ideas, and so on. If we dared to change small stats a lot more often and added weaker units and then slowly patching them until they became better, I dont see a problem with a fourth race at all. However, I dont see that happend. Ever.
|
On March 16 2015 14:47 TAMinator wrote:
It'd be even harder for newer players to get into SC. Knowing enough build orders for 3 matchups with 5+ maps is already a struggle, adding another race just makes it worse. They're already having trouble balancing 3 races, 4 would probably just create more balance whine which is the last thing SC needs.
Dont think learning builds on specific maps is what makes the newcomers considering SC2 hard.
Its more the intensity of multitasking, microing and macroing 
If they place the barrack down on 12 or 13, I dont think it matters at all for them 
|
On March 16 2015 15:05 Glorfindel! wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 14:47 TAMinator wrote:
It'd be even harder for newer players to get into SC. Knowing enough build orders for 3 matchups with 5+ maps is already a struggle, adding another race just makes it worse. They're already having trouble balancing 3 races, 4 would probably just create more balance whine which is the last thing SC needs. Dont think learning builds on specific maps is what makes the newcomers considering SC2 hard. Its more the intensity of multitasking, microing and macroing If they place the barrack down on 12 or 13, I dont think it matters at all for them
yeah obvious thats one of the key problems for newbies but i'm just talking in relation to the OPs idea. Knowing more build orders and on what maps with 4 races is certainly another hurdle for newcomers which certainly isnt needed.
|
On March 16 2015 15:10 TAMinator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2015 15:05 Glorfindel! wrote:On March 16 2015 14:47 TAMinator wrote:
It'd be even harder for newer players to get into SC. Knowing enough build orders for 3 matchups with 5+ maps is already a struggle, adding another race just makes it worse. They're already having trouble balancing 3 races, 4 would probably just create more balance whine which is the last thing SC needs. Dont think learning builds on specific maps is what makes the newcomers considering SC2 hard. Its more the intensity of multitasking, microing and macroing If they place the barrack down on 12 or 13, I dont think it matters at all for them yeah obvious thats one of the key problems for newbies but i'm just talking in relation to the OPs idea. Knowing more build orders and on what maps with 4 races is certainly another hurdle for newcomers which certainly isnt needed.
I feel like build orders affect the already commited players a lot more than the newbies, and for them it wouldn't be nearly as big of a deal. Some build orders might even carry over a lot depending on how the new race would work.
|
There are a number of creative difficulties, mainly making a new race that is sufficiently distinct from the existing ones both lore wise and design wise, and also making it mesh with the existing campaign. Using the Xel'naga helps solve some of those problems, but also introduces others, since the Xel'naga are supposed to be on a higher plane of power. These alone makes it nearly impossible to implement elegantly in SCII.
The balance problem is why it shouldn't be implemented. Adding a fourth race nearly doubles the burden of evaluating each balance change, and also doubles the chances of things going wrong. Warcraft III your examples suffered from balance problems due to that. No RTS has succeeded in balancing four races successfully, and while it probably can be done, it can probably only be done with a game with that goal specifically in mind from the start. Shoehorning in a fourth race would result in inevitable failure balance wise.
|
I recall a rather interesting argument about how having an even number of races (4 in the case of Warcraft 3) creates a special and particular difficulty about balancing in relation to competitive tournament formats.
Suppose that 'perfect racial balance' was not the current state of the game and that there were some strong and weak match-ups. For the illustrative example, let's say that you were an Undead player in WC3:
- there would be the UD vs UD mirror match of course, which will always be 'balanced' in virtue of being the mirror
- but let's suppose that in the current balance: UD had weak match-ups against Human and Night Elf, but was strong against Orc
Supposing a fairly balanced distribution of player races in a tournament, that means that in playing UD during a tournament, one would expect to be disadvantaged (or play an unfavourable matchup) in 66% of the games played. In 2 out of the 3 non-mirror matches, you would be in for a tougher time just because of the race you play.
And I suppose it is also possible for some race to be favoured in 3/3 of the other non-mirrors and for another race to be 0/3.
***
Since achieving 'perfect balance' is not an easy thing, perhaps it would be better (or at least, less problematic) for there to be an odd number of races. This way, it is more possible to have an asymmetric 'balance.'
For example, perhaps it would be less problematic for tournament prospects if the racial 'balance' was something like:
TvT is the mirror, balanced by nature
TvP is slightly T-favoured
TvZ is slightly Z-favoured
Thus there is an equal number of favoured and unfavoured prospective matches in a tournament bracket.
***
So, four races might be tricky - but not because four is more than three and is thereby trickier (which it would be). But because four is an even number.
But what about making it an odd number again by adding in 'the fifth race'? [No, that's not intended to be an allusion to anything]. I imagine the balancing would be even more nightmarish with so many variables and match-ups to consider at that point.
|
Well if we look at WC3, it seems possible kinda?
Maybe wc3 was a better game for having more races because of tavern heroes and stuff?(I have never played wc3).
Maybe sc2 is easier to balance 4 races because the races do not have crazy hero units and such?
It's a tough one for sure, I personally welcome the idea and it would be very fun to me, but probably destroy competative play for quite awhile, if not, forever.
(Just wait for WC4 to come after LoTV hehehehehe)
|
On March 16 2015 15:54 The_Frozen_Inferno wrote:
I recall a rather interesting argument about how having an even number of races (4 in the case of Warcraft 3) creates a special and particular difficulty about balancing in relation to competitive tournament formats.
Suppose that 'perfect racial balance' was not the current state of the game and that there were some strong and weak match-ups. For the illustrative example, let's say that you were an Undead player in WC3:
- there would be the UD vs UD mirror match of course, which will always be 'balanced' in virtue of being the mirror
- but let's suppose that in the current balance: UD had weak match-ups against Human and Night Elf, but was strong against Orc
Supposing a fairly balanced distribution of player races in a tournament, that means that in playing UD during a tournament, one would expect to be disadvantaged (or play an unfavourable matchup) in 66% of the games played. In 2 out of the 3 non-mirror matches, you would be in for a tougher time just because of the race you play.
And I suppose it is also possible for some race to be favoured in 3/3 of the other non-mirrors and for another race to be 0/3.
***
Since achieving 'perfect balance' is not an easy thing, perhaps it would be better (or at least, less problematic) for there to be an odd number of races. This way, it is more possible to have an asymmetric 'balance.'
For example, perhaps it would be less problematic for tournament prospects if the racial 'balance' was something like:
TvT is the mirror, balanced by nature
TvP is slightly T-favoured
TvZ is slightly Z-favoured
Thus there is an equal number of favoured and unfavoured prospective matches in a tournament bracket.
***
So, four races might be tricky - but not because four is more than three and is thereby trickier (which it would be). But because four is an even number.
But what about making it an odd number again by adding in 'the fifth race'? [No, that's not intended to be an allusion to anything]. I imagine the balancing would be even more nightmarish with so many variables and match-ups to consider at that point.
I've heard that argument and never been particularly convinced. The main argument for it, is that Brood War ended up like that, but I don't think that a game that is more or less regularly patched should aim for that. If your balance changes are precise enough to aim for small enough edges in match-ups so that tournaments would not be affected overly by race-related bracket luck, you should just aim for absolute balance instead. If you don't have that precision, aiming for small edges might result in match-ups that are severely imbalanced more so than their supposedly symmetric counterparts (which to a milder extent happened in BW).
Either way I agree that for whatever reason, balancing multiple (4+) races has never been met with much success.
|
Ever heard of WarCraft 3? Ohhhhh yea.......
EDIT : No , not in StarCraft, Do you think they could had a 4th race in BroodWar ? I don't think so....
|
It would be really cool to see but it would most likely never work lol.
|
I like the idea, it would do wonders and be amazing.
The thing is, to implement this it would take tooons of work. Maybe it would be possible 3-4 years after lotv and lets be honest who thinks blizzard has the will to put down that kind of investment in starcraft at this point.
It would be cool, it could bring SC2 back to glory but it is just so unlikely it isn't worth considering to be frank. Its not going to happen, if it did it would be magical though..
|
I'm surprised by the overall negative response. Surely there'd be issues but overall its an interesting enough idea to look into I'd think
|
There are tons and tons of ways of diversifying the game that hasn't been explored already. Diversify maps. Make it so that at least two different macro styles are viable per race per MU. Make less "rigid" unit concepts. edit : and new units ofc. etc etc.
No need to add a fourth race. It worked in WC3 (and even then, some people would tell you that WC3 wasn't really that balanced, although it mainly was) because while being a RTS too, WC3 was a totally different concept compared to SC2, and since what you did with your units was way more important than which units you had (and when you had them), imbalances could be fought by simply playing better than your opponent (that's true in SC2 too, but to a much lesser extent).
Additionally I seriously doubt that this would magically bring SC2 back to the top eSports status. If anything new players will find it even more complicated AND people will have even more reasons to complain about imbalance. Casuals get bored because of having to spam 50+ APM and having to look and think at multiple things at the same time, not because of having "only" three races, which is already a fucking high number.
|
I personally would like to see it but it obviously will make balancing the game more difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
