I was playing a couple of games, and noticed that...many units in sc2 are kind of trash. There are many, many units that were bastardized until their original design intent was lost, and others that never quite worked well. There are some other units that were buffed in a way that would make them widely overpowered in specific situations, just to make them slightly viable (see: BC with teleport). Units like the corruptor were supposed to “corrupt” units as a way to mind control them, then it was changed to corrupt buildings and make them unable to make units, then corruption targeted one unit and made it receive extra damage. Finally, in LotV the Corruptor is as bland as it can be, but now has a broken ability that kills buildings super fast and is useless in most situations, overpowered in some.
That’s also the case with many other units, like the Thor originally giving it an area damage ability, that was so bad it's normal attack dealt more dps, then giving it a ranged air atack, then giving him both a +light attack and a + massive one, etc.
However, there are also units that work really well. Blink stalkers is an example of a well designed ability. Unfortunately, LotV and it’s increased speed, reduced the window of blink’s utility, and a damage boost was given to the stalker to compensate. Thanks to this we still see some of it, although not as much as in earlier expansion. The iinteraction between banelings and marines is also pretty cool (balance aside).
I want to make a poll of which units would you keep for SC3, if it ever happens. You can leave your reasoning and own list below.
Before we continue, there are certain units that I believe are core to each race, and should be included in every starcraft game. They are the following:
Zerg:
Zergling
Hydralisk
Mutalisk
Ultralisk
Overlord
Terran:
Marine
Some form of Medic
Ghost
Siege Tank
Battle Cruiser.
Protoss:
Zealot
High Templar
Dark Templar
Archon
Carrier
Observer
These units therefore will not be included in the polls. But feel free to comment about them below.
You cannot see the results until you vote. You dont need to be logged-in to vote. Vote once, and truthfully to what you believe would be objectively good for the game. (And not just because “I lost the ladder to it”.) Vote on every unit, then refresh the page to see the results.
Since so many polls can be confusing, the yes/no/maybe options answer to the question above them. So its Question Answer
Zerg:
Poll: Would you keep the Baneling?
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Roach?
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Ravager?
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Viper?
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Infestor
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Mutalisk
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Corruptor
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Swarm Host
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Brood Lord
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Queen
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Nydus
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Terran:
Poll: Would you keep the Reaper
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Marauder
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Hellion
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Hellbat
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Cyclone
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Thor
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Widow Mine
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Viking
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Medivac
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Liberator
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Raven
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Banshee
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Protoss
Poll: Would you keep the Sentry
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Adept
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Stalker
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Warp Prism
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Immortal
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Colossus
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Disruptor
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Phoenix
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Void Ray
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Oracle
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Tempest
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Poll: Would you keep the Mothership
(Vote): Yes (Vote): No (Vote): Maybe with some changes
Also, is there any unit that under no circumstance you would want to see in sc3? Not only you don’t want it, but you feel so strongly against it that you would hate the game if it had them.
I personally really hate Widow Mines, I have varying opinions on basically every other unit based on perceived strength vs. playability, but I really hate Widow Mines in particular for how swingy they are.
Consolidating Protoss splash would be nice imo, cut my boy long legged boy Colossus out and let the Disrupter be the ground AoE unit.
Viper sucks, another very swingy unit imo, cool model and all though. I wish Zerg was more centered around Roaches, Hydras, and Lings supported by tech units. I generally wish end game armies in StarCraft would be more supported by high tech units instead of made up entirely of them lol
I only voted yes to lurker, nydus, viking, and phoenix. I think lurker and nydus are just as iconic to Zerg as the other units that didn't get polled. I also think vikings and phoenixes are an improvement to their brood war predecessors and have evolved into core units so it would be nice to see them stay. Everything else can get reworked for new flavors of gameplay!
Also, you made a poll for mutalisk even though you consider it core to the race and said you wouldn't poll it (I agree with you, just thought you might wanted to edit it out).
BW sentimental feeling does indeed influence the poll's results. From Zerg perspective, I loved Infestor a lot . Rather than swarm host, this unit should be designed to harass as much as Oracle, High Templar, and Raven do. They should just remove swarm host and add Infested Terran option once again. Of course, Infestor can cast Infested Terran with flying capability like Locusts did but it can be done only without Infestor burrowing himself.
Another thing, Zerg should has air unit that was equivalent to Battlecruiser and Carrier by one-to-one ambush.
It's a little hard to vote in this since what I'd want in would depend on what else was going in. For example, SC2 added moderately tanky, low range, ground to ground only units with weird movement-related gimmicks for each race: the roach, the marauder, and the adapt. I don't think that these are all terrible or anything, but I'd like to see one or two of them switched out for something more distinctive, and I don't care too much which go.
I actually really enjoyed these questions, because it made me realize that in an ideal setting, I'd cut or change 75%+ of the units. And then it made me realize what units I'd keep.
I agree with swarminfestor that BW sentiment drives a lot more than I expected.
But I also think that a lot of designs really aren't... interesting? Or even good. They end up working fine because it helped balance the game, sure, but I think I'd scrap half of Terran, and redesign almost all of the other half. I'd change or remove half of Zerg and Protoss.
Swarm host, Roach, Corruptor, Broodlord are all easily disposable. I think I like Zerg the most overall, with stuff like Zerglings, Queens, Nydus, Lurkers, Mutas. Things that provide unique dynamics to the race. Things that aren't really 1-dimensional like the roach.
I'd certainly remove Protoss' Adepts, Tempests, Disruptor, Immortal. But it's got some interesting spell casters and sky units that with some changes, could feel like more than just retroactively designed 'hard counters'. The phoenix design is very cool, being able to lift units. But the extreme hard-countering design of SC2 is inherently unappealing. Phoenix to counter Mutas. Immortals to counter tanks. etc.
Terran is a weird one where I feel like on some level, it's neat, and I've always enjoyed watching Terran the most. But I found out that I'd still change most of it. Scrap widow mine, cyclone, liberator, hellbat, marauder. Those are either lame designs or just annoying hard counters. Change many of the rest? I think they tried to keep Terran as the tactical race, and I think it mostly succeeded. But when I think of BW vs SC2, I feel like they could never really get it right.
In the end, I think it's mostly just that I see Broodwar as the better designed game, even if it may have been by accident. Even if the pathing and UX in it is shit. I think the race dynamics just worked so well, and the strategies always felt varied, and the map designs were able to bring out interesting aspects without breaking the game. And I think of the stuff they added to SC2 and feel disappointment. And this is someone who played 50x more hours of SC2 than BW....
Here's exactly what must change in the game. If this doesn't get implemented then all fundamental RTS rules have been broken and we will have a fundamentally flawed game which can't be saved by any balance changes.
1. Remove all ground units except Cyclones, Ultralisks and Sentrys 2. Every race gets a hero unit, 20 supply - 600/600 cost. Capable of defeating armys alone. 3. Workers can only be produced from this hero unit 4. Max worker cap is 40 - if one dies it cannot be replaced. 5. All spells cost only 10% of its current mana
I just look at results and not few of them are surprising me.
Without a pro's opinion of what distinguishes the rank of master from grand master in terms of micro (and if SC3 has to be the old school one) it is difficult to answer which part of the game should modifications respond to.
I will try occasionally to speak to our French pros to ask them what is too intense and laborious in terms of micro.
For the moment and if we always start from the only way more or less that, to balance the game : “all things being equal between them, the units must be as effective between them.”
For example, the carrier is supposed to be good at pretty much anything since his interceptors don't have specific bonuses against a unit type. If we put aside for a moment how to counter them with infestors (or grab them with a viper (!?) – and without talking about storms against ennemies units like vikings or corruptors), everyone knows that only vikings/corruptors are able to snip carriers but (all other things being equal…) Now, let's admit that I have 50 carriers, they would have to beat 150 corrupters ... And we all know that will not happen ..
In this part of the game, the question I m asking to community : wouldn't it be better, for example, to give damage penalties depending on which armor your unit is attacking.
As a result, we avoid an escalation of "which is the best of the best units" ...
Edit : just checked, ravager, ghost, queen and archons have no tag (light or armored) so i would like they belong to a tag in SC3 (even if no penalties damage, which would mean, add a third tag ... but generally in SC2 it seems there s only two tags...)
I think that there is difference between keeping core concept and is the unit current design the best or too iconic for change. For example having two kind of Dragoons, one lighter and one heavier, is conceptually great as machines with spider legs is aesthetically heavily part of Protoss. If Protoss is to have tanky hard hitter that is mass produced it feels natural to be like Immortal and not some buff Zealot or floating vehicle. However, maybe while Immortal is kind of best of its concept, Stalker feels much more easier to change especially when there is Adept-like units. Another examples are Voidray and Distruptor, they both feel protossy and have base concept that probably should be filled for Protoss, but their current gameplay and implementation feels problematic.
Lots of polls! I voted No on most of them, not because I disliked the units or thought they were broken, but because outside of the traditional SC1/SC2 core units for each race (which you preemptively listed in your OP), I would like to see a whole new collection of novel units.
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
Yes (52) 65%
No (9) 11%
Maybe with some changes (19) 24%
80 total votes
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
I voted "yes" on most of them, not because I particularly want to have everything back, nor because I don't want to see them change the unit, obviously some changes would be made to pretty much all units in a new game, but I voted on the idea behind the unit. A new game wouldn't need to have all of them, (I'd rather it didn't) but I'd be interested to have a lot of them back.
Obviously I wouldn't want SH-Nydus bullshit to be in SC3, but I actually like the modern SH of a very supply inneficiant high bursting range units that attack with "free units" but is unable to protect itself, it can be used very creativelly. (I'd go as far as saying I quite like to play against it, it's pretty active). But screw the old SH, that thing was a disaster.
The only one I really don't want to see back are the A-Move units that can do everything and are mostly there to get massed at most level for me thats the Void-Ray, the Brood-lord, the Thor and the corruptor.
The one I said I'd keep with some changes are the one I think there's potential in some of the idea behind them, but they need to be rethink a bit. (Baneling, Queens, Mothership, Reapers, WM)
Also on a side note, I think the Roaches has been way more of a core zerg unit than the Hydra in SC2, with the idea of a very early tech crossroad being implemented to the race. I'd go as far as saying that I have more worries with the Hydra comming back than the Roach/Ravager, since the Hydra can at time become a mega-marine that is just good vs anything if you have enough of them.
Also, screw DT, I don't care if it's a "core unit" a unit that is always cloak and hit like a tank is a bad concept that should just be remove.
My view is that, to be really good, SC3 would need an overall design vision that went beyond "let's rejig units and some mechanics again". I don't think Blizzard has been a company capable of having this kind of vision for a really long time now. I don't think SC2 had the requisite level of vision, and although I enjoy watching it as an esport, my opinion is that its design doesn't improve on BW (as an esport), its aesthetic undermines BW (especially in the aesthetic design of protoss), and its lore took a turn toward the cliche compared to BW. And, what's worse, it is hard for me to imagine them making an SC3 that improves on SC2. Basically what I'm getting at here is that I'm happy to see pretty much any unit in a hypothetical SC3 if it's done well. My view is that any units could work under the right vision and direction. But I think that won't happen, and selection of unit comp is meaningless without it.
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
Or they remember BW? Or they generally think it could be a good unit if implemented well in a different game? Or they have a different view of it in SC2? Or they don't think this is a problem (e.g., skytoss DOES exist; a range nerf is not a request to remove the unit from the game entirely)? Or... countless other things I'm not thinking of off the top of my head?
I voted and these polls are definitely interesting, but imo if SC3 happens it will need a huge design overhaul, especially for the Protoss race. In that direction I think your poll, which includes Nydus, should definitely include Warpgate, for which I'd vote "keep but with tweaks" because as sexy as the idea is (hell, I chose to play Protoss when I picked up the game because of that teleport feature) I've come to the conclusion you can't have a healthy Protoss design in a game that includes it in its current state.
I said no to maybe 70% of the options and 20% yes with changes lol. I truly enjoy watching SC2, but I'd change a lot. I think that some could be used or blended from BW and I think something entirely new could work.
For example, I love the dragoon from BW, but the Stalker was a better fit for the pace of SC2. I'd be okay with a completely new core unit for Protoss in the next one.
Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
Yes (52) 65%
No (9) 11%
Maybe with some changes (19) 24%
80 total votes
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
Or they remember BW? Or they generally think it could be a good unit if implemented well in a different game? Or they have a different view of it in SC2? Or they don't think this is a problem (e.g., skytoss DOES exist; a range nerf is not a request to remove the unit from the game entirely)? Or... countless other things I'm not thinking of off the top of my head?
I m happy you react to my post,
I m sad cause 65% doesn t listen pro opinions... Last week, an entire thread has been written and for once i do read it entirely and i find the discuss was straight line and interesting,... and i was happy to read an unanimously opinion about lurker.
That s very rare here, isn t it ? Now surprisingly, we see a lot of hidden opinions in contradiction with what the majority of writers think. Maybe this vote is a proof of something, but definetly this vote doesn t reflect a wise direction concerning an eventual patch, from Blizzard or from community.
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
Yes (52) 65%
No (9) 11%
Maybe with some changes (19) 24%
80 total votes
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
Or they remember BW? Or they generally think it could be a good unit if implemented well in a different game? Or they have a different view of it in SC2? Or they don't think this is a problem (e.g., skytoss DOES exist; a range nerf is not a request to remove the unit from the game entirely)? Or... countless other things I'm not thinking of off the top of my head?
I m happy you react to my post,
I m sad cause 65% doesn t listen pro opinions... Last week, an entire thread has been written and for once i do read it entirely and i find the discuss was straight line and interesting,... and i was happy to read an unanimously opinion about lurker.
That s very rare here, isn t it ? Now surprisingly, we see a lot of hidden opinions in contradiction with what the majority of writers think. Maybe this vote is a proof of something, but definetly this vote doesn t reflect a wise direction concerning an eventual patch, from Blizzard or from community.
I voted yes for the lurker. It's a great unit in Brood War. It's okay in SC2, but I see future in which the 80% of the units are change or modified in some way and that the pacing, style, and maps are different too. I don't see the poll saying SC3 is a SC2 clone, but you can choose what units stay and go. I think a well designed SC3 has a place where lurkers work and make sense.
I would not want any of the following badly designed units
1.Swarm host- This unit is awful, infinite value free units are just not good for the game. 2.broodlord - similar issues to swarm host, also broodlings activly inhibit micro and interesting game play, I would want a guardian or something similar for zerg instead, maybe something better vs mech/ late game toss and worse vs bio, and midgame toss unit comps. should be a situational unit. 3.infestor - fungal and neural are both badly designed abilities. back when they had infested terran that was terrible. Give zerg a nerfed defiler (sc1 defiler is a bit to busted imo, its a miracle broodwar zerg is not broken) 4.curropter- I want to see the generic this unit is a slow air to air unit from each race removed, each race should have their ground to air significantly buffed. 5.cyclone - awkward design, I think its interesting but has some problematic interactions, and due to how strong lock on is it has to be pretty weak and have a slow build time to prevent it from being busted. 6.thor - why couldnt they just giver terran goliaths, evrey terran wants goliaths. No one wanted this dumb big robot. Its in an ok state now but its been a balance and design problem child forever, even now the anti air is either to week vs op air deathballs or way to good vs individual support units like vipers, liberators, and medivacs 7.hellbat -this unit is basically useful in alliins, that's pretty much what it does, kind of boring to. not a fan. 8.viking - same as corruptor put anti air units on the ground plz. 9.sentry - this unit and warpgate where really bad choices for protoss's design imo. I think the idea of protoss having an early game support caster is cool and goes well with their identity but forcefield is often to good and protoss has to be heavily balanced around it. Less so know with ravagers and faster economy then back in the day, but i still think its design is problematic. 10.voidray- this unit is either useless or overpowered give toss something different. Also same comment as corrupter and Viking. 11.warp prism - if their was an sc3 I would really hate to see a warp in mechanic. make protoss like sc1 toss not sc2. Strong badass gateway units and cool but not op tech options like hts, reavers, carriers, and corsairs. Broodwar toss is soooo much cooler and more interesting than sc2 toss.
for zerg I would hope they keep: Banelings - great unit, was op at one point but just needed number tweaks. It works realy well with zergs identy and promotes micro, runbys, drops, burrow, and all sorts of cool stuff. Great unit Mutalisk- Iconic, cool, maybe a bit op but its just to much part of zergs identy to remove.
I would hope they change: Queen- I like the concept of the queen and both larva inject and creep are cool mechanic that really fit zerg, but I would want some changes. Right now queens have to be insanely strong because of other op units other races have but its a bit much. Lurker- I want lurkers, I want zerg siege units, but its not very balanced atm and it cant be as good as it is. I think it would have been cool if they made it like one of the campaign variants of the lurker where instead of having an aoe line attack it could just hit one unit but it does really big damage. In general I want zerg with more counters to big units and air but less dominance vs small and mid tier units when they get high up in the tech tree. Roach- I don't have anything against the roach, but I think that it would be cool to give zerg something else to play with in sc3. its kind of generic so it dont think most zergs would be to upset if it were cut for something else.
Terran Keep wiodowmine- I know alot of people will hate this but I think the widow mine is good for the game. It forces players to pay attention, gives terran a good answer to to many tanky melee units, is an interesting unit, and has some great interactions in tvz. reaper- this units is also great. It scouts it creates some early game tensions/interactions and it has a very high skill cap both individually and when massed. Marauder- I think bio is great. Marauder is an important part of why terran bio in sc2 works. Medivac- This units is great its very usefull, provides strategic options as well as in battle utility, and is not op. Great unit.
Change: Raven: The raven is not all bad I think disable is a cool spell, so is anti armor missle. I have mixed feelings about auto turret. I may have preferred terran having science vessels but honestly this is what I think a spell caster should be. A unit that helps you counter specific units like bcs, tanks and colossi, has some decent utility like missle, and some damage output in a pinch, turret. It was realy problematic before they reworked it though for the same reason infesters were, turret is basically a free unit its just not nearly as op as infested terran were.
Protoss keep Phoenix, the phoenix is like a scout if it were actually well designed and useful. Imortal- This unit is really cool and fits protoss really well. I want a protoss that has both immortals and dragoons so cool! Oracle- I really like the oracle it provides good utility, harassment, and vision. Overall a well designed unit in its current state. It does need carfull tuning on its numbers though it was realy dumb when you could mass them. also the time blizzard did not think about this unit when they brought back old crono and for alike a week pvt was a free win because you could get a 4 minute oracle and auto win vs any terran not going 1 base. That was dumb, glad they nerfed that real quick.
change: disruptor in therory i like the idea of a dodgeble skillshot aoe unit for protoss, in practice once massed it can become overwhelming. also the projectile should be dodgeble by all races. Its very stupid that ravagers cant dodge it off creep.
It astonishes me that zerg doesn't have a 1-food unit in sc2. i know the roach used to be 1 food, but the fact the swarm race has a lot of 2-supply units is really off to me.
Brood War would be a good starting point for sc3. Some kind of blending of the best ideas from both games might also work.
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
I have a feeling as the pool goes on, we'll end up votting to remove essentially all unit except for Mutmut and lurker.
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
yeah I agree, Reaper hate is surprising its a very well designed unit.
I'm also very surprised by the hate for the baneling. I think the baneling is a great unit. Its interactions with marines is one of the core elements that makes sc2 tvz so exciting to watch and play. Why would you get rid of it??? It has so many uses and it's one of those units that scales well with skill and exicution.
Im shocked though that any one would want to keep the brood lord like wth.
Glad to see we at least all agree that the swarmhost is a teribly desinged unit though
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
Yes (52) 65%
No (9) 11%
Maybe with some changes (19) 24%
80 total votes
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
Or they remember BW? Or they generally think it could be a good unit if implemented well in a different game? Or they have a different view of it in SC2? Or they don't think this is a problem (e.g., skytoss DOES exist; a range nerf is not a request to remove the unit from the game entirely)? Or... countless other things I'm not thinking of off the top of my head?
I m happy you react to my post,
I m sad cause 65% doesn t listen pro opinions... Last week, an entire thread has been written and for once i do read it entirely and i find the discuss was straight line and interesting,... and i was happy to read an unanimously opinion about lurker.
That s very rare here, isn t it ? Now surprisingly, we see a lot of hidden opinions in contradiction with what the majority of writers think. Maybe this vote is a proof of something, but definetly this vote doesn t reflect a wise direction concerning an eventual patch, from Blizzard or from community.
I voted yes for the lurker. It's a great unit in Brood War. It's okay in SC2, but I see future in which the 80% of the units are change or modified in some way and that the pacing, style, and maps are different too. I don't see the poll saying SC3 is a SC2 clone, but you can choose what units stay and go. I think a well designed SC3 has a place where lurkers work and make sense.
I may understand, so this vote should deserve a better description, as 'YES, with very few caracteristics modifications (cause option : with changes is mainly about 'design modifications')
Is there another unit which can be revelant as lurkers in term of contradiction ?
On September 03 2021 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Lots of polls!
Yes lot of polls, this is surprising and a good start
Is a giant poll about part of the game which has to be reworked or no, could be interesting (with pro advices in order to get a less intensive game in micro) ?
Comments aside, i think OP should include BattleCruiser since they had "teleport" spell (...)
And there s an awfull result which is a shame from what we discussed about one weeks :
Poll: Would you keep the Lurker?
Yes (52) 65%
No (9) 11%
Maybe with some changes (19) 24%
80 total votes
This kind of votes just give me the feeling to never think about a future SC3 (only 24% against 65%) because some pros already said it in the latest thread :
On August 30 2021 23:09 MyiPtitDrogo wrote: I'll say this only reading a little bit of the thread like the true sigma male that I am, but if skytoss didn't exist yea the lurker would need a range nerf almost 100%.
Thing is by the time lurker becomes broken you usually have unit they can't shoot so it's alright, but skytoss games are sad so I completely understand why you would want a more ground based lategame
It means most of members here are Zerg, isn t it ?
Or they remember BW? Or they generally think it could be a good unit if implemented well in a different game? Or they have a different view of it in SC2? Or they don't think this is a problem (e.g., skytoss DOES exist; a range nerf is not a request to remove the unit from the game entirely)? Or... countless other things I'm not thinking of off the top of my head?
I m happy you react to my post,
I m sad cause 65% doesn t listen pro opinions... Last week, an entire thread has been written and for once i do read it entirely and i find the discuss was straight line and interesting,... and i was happy to read an unanimously opinion about lurker.
That s very rare here, isn t it ? Now surprisingly, we see a lot of hidden opinions in contradiction with what the majority of writers think. Maybe this vote is a proof of something, but definetly this vote doesn t reflect a wise direction concerning an eventual patch, from Blizzard or from community.
I voted yes for the lurker. It's a great unit in Brood War. It's okay in SC2, but I see future in which the 80% of the units are change or modified in some way and that the pacing, style, and maps are different too. I don't see the poll saying SC3 is a SC2 clone, but you can choose what units stay and go. I think a well designed SC3 has a place where lurkers work and make sense.
I may understand, so this vote should deserve a better description, as 'YES, with very few caracteristics modifications (cause option : with changes is about 'design modifications')
I would want changes. I'm not a fan of how lurker works in sc2, and tbh I'm not huge on it in sc1 either. for instance the strength of stacking lurkers on ramps has always bothered me.
I would like a very diffrent lurker in an sc3. I think it would be realy cool if instead of an aoe unit it was more like a very strong mobile stealthed long range sunken collony. It only hits one target with no splash but does a huge amount of damage. Kind of like a ground liberator. I think this would be a much better role for the lurker as now its a counter unit to strong big ground units instead of a small ground unit shredder. I want banelings and a reworked lurker if we get sc3. not lurkers as zergs primary ground aoe.
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
yeah I agree, Reaper hate is surprising its a very well designed unit.
I'm also very surprised by the hate for the baneling. I think the baneling is a great unit. Its interactions with marines is one of the core elements that makes sc2 tvz so exciting to watch and play. Why would you get rid of it??? It has so many uses and is one of those units that scales well with skill and exicution.
Im shocked though that any one would want to keep the brood lord like wth.
Glad to see we at least all agree that the swarmhost is a teribly desinged unit though
Hey I like the Swarmhost! Lots of micro and strategy going into using it and defending against it.
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
yeah I agree, Reaper hate is surprising its a very well designed unit.
I'm also very surprised by the hate for the baneling. I think the baneling is a great unit. Its interactions with marines is one of the core elements that makes sc2 tvz so exciting to watch and play. Why would you get rid of it??? It has so many uses and it's one of those units that scales well with skill and exicution.
Im shocked though that any one would want to keep the brood lord like wth.
Glad to see we at least all agree that the swarmhost is a teribly desinged unit though
yeah I do love the baneling as well and it indeed interacts amazingly with marines, but I can get how difficult it can be to balance the game around an unit which is so supply efficient.
Just out of curiosity because I really think this is an important point in such a discussion :
Poll: would you keep warpgate ?
no (27)
49%
yes (15)
27%
yes but with tweaks (13)
24%
55 total votes
Your vote: would you keep warpgate ?
(Vote): yes (Vote): no (Vote): yes but with tweaks
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
yeah I agree, Reaper hate is surprising its a very well designed unit.
I'm also very surprised by the hate for the baneling. I think the baneling is a great unit. Its interactions with marines is one of the core elements that makes sc2 tvz so exciting to watch and play. Why would you get rid of it??? It has so many uses and it's one of those units that scales well with skill and exicution.
Im shocked though that any one would want to keep the brood lord like wth.
Glad to see we at least all agree that the swarmhost is a teribly desinged unit though
yeah I do love the baneling as well and it indeed interacts amazingly with marines, but I can get how difficult it can be to balance the game around an unit which is so supply efficient.
Just out of curiosity because I really think this is an important point in such a discussion :
Poll: would you keep warpgate ?
no (27)
49%
yes (15)
27%
yes but with tweaks (13)
24%
55 total votes
Your vote: would you keep warpgate ?
(Vote): yes (Vote): no (Vote): yes but with tweaks
I would most certainly not keep warpgate. For warpgate to be ballanced all toss gateway units have to be kind of terrible outside of specific timings where you can overwelm with them by abusing the warpgate mechanic. To me Starcraft brood war protoss is just so much cooler than starcraft 2 protoss and a big part of that is the strenght of individual gateway protoss units in brood war compared to sc2.
If we did have to keep it I would want something like warpgate takes twice as long as regular gateways to produce units, that way you could make it for its utility or for one offensive warpin, but most of the time you are using gateways to macro.
I'd like a few more polls regarding buildings. I also would like map feature polls. I would 100% vote for high ground advantage like in SC1. I think it is a brilliant way to improve defense at home and positions around the map.
It d be nice to be able to do muta stacking and micro again
Less spellcasting overall would be great too. Like ok blink for stalker why not, but adept should go, blink dt, teleporting bc etc as well. There are just too many spells spread out over the units.
Less air ships: no need for void ray and carriers and tempest, pick one (carrier?), No liberator either, no Oracle (at least no with the ability to erase a mineral line that fast)
Edit: also high ground advantage as said above. Maybe also lower dps over the board so battles last a bit longer (allows more micro/flanking)
I actually like most of the SC2 units. I think the biggest issues with SC2 are the supremacy of air units late game and the Queen being way too strong all around, though creep spread + inject are cool. A redesign where air units are strictly worse at head to head fights than ground units of the same tier and their primary advantage is not being constrained by terrain would be great, though I suppose that could come with the risk of making things like lurkers and siege tanks way too powerful.
People wouldn't keep banelings but would keep the immortal!? What is wrong with you people!
For reals though, banelings have consistently provided some of the most fun moments in SC2 over the last 10 years. I've always considered them the best new unit.
I'm also surprised people would keep the viking. I consider that to be a fairly boring unit.
Warp gate isn't really a problem when you are warping in 2-6 units to stop harass or as a drop, but when you warp in 8-12 units as "harass", to defend a sizeable attack, or as main way of production. The easy change is to separate warp in from Gateway to its own building and limit what it can warp in such way that it doesn't become main way of producing units. If the warp in as reinforcement is a problem make warp prism require much more time setting up safely. Without experimenting with the concept more I don't really see why it should be feared as much when Nydus can allow same kind of fast army movement and be received very well.
I must say I'm also surprised at the results so far, buts it's only been like 12 hours so the results night change.
Also in retrospective, "maybe with some changes" should have said "yes with some changes". Maybe I'll put a note in the OP.
I think the warp gate discussion deserves its own thread honestly, alongside inject, mule, chronoboost and not be buried in a comment. For what is worth i like warpage, but building time should definitely be higher. Maybe warp gate reduces building time from normal gateways by like 10% let's your warp units from warpgates at a 20% increased cooldown (Stalkers would have a cool down of 37 seconds instead of 30 for example).
I'm surprised people don't like adepts, I think with some tweaks they could be a cool unit. Also surprised people don't like tempests. I remember when they were announced they were supposed to be short range, area damage units that would just wreck mutas. Watching that video was the happiest day of my life. Then they changed them to have 15 range, with an upgrade to have 22(!!!) Range, which was crazy. And finally their current state, having I think 10 range against ground and 14 against air (which is super confusing btw because the range indicator they have is for the air, so they always get much closer than what you'd think when attacking ground).
Still, I really like them. They are situational but it's good that Protoss has an actual siege unit, specially with the damage to building upgrades, that's not very good at direct engages. I think it's an interesting unit.
Finally surprised people like the immortal. I personally love how it looks, but I think it needs some tweaks. Also, could we remove the terrible animation it has for its barrier now and put the old visual back in? The new animation just puts a weird white thing on his arms, while the previous one was a badass spherical shield made out of hexagons that reacted to where the attacks were coming from.
Just look at how bad ass this looks
Hell, in general the new barrier is kind of shitty. Makes immortals better vs units like marines, baenlings and other fast units, and its literally useless agaisnt tanks since it activates after receiving damage, so the immortal gets 70 damage, and then it is active for 2 seconds and absords the damage, but the siege tank atacks every 2.17 seconds, which means the second shot happens after barriers expired, dealing full damage. And the barrier has a 32 (!!) second cooldown. It's kind of a lame design honestly.
Others could be tweaked if not remowed. But naturally I would be the most interested in the NEW units SC3 could offer. I don't want an SC:BW remake, or SC2++, but a fresh new game. Sadly I seriously doubt SC3 ever sees the light of day.
The more I vote no on units the more I realize I don't really like a lot of the units in sc2. I think the only unit I voted to keep was the reaper (with changes) because I like the unit's interaction. But other than that the rest seems meh. Most of the hero units should go, imo.
On September 03 2021 22:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: Just saw the results after a refresh, and I'm a bit surprised by some things. I think there is a heavy BW bias for some units, for instance I was astonished to see the muta get such a plebiscite and an overwhelming majority of yes for the lurker, while the reaper which is imo quite a well designed unit gets very little love. Anyway, very very interesting.
I feel like there's a bias agaisnt new units in general. Right now the majority are removing every single LOTV and HOTS units, with the exception of lurker that everyone wants to keep (and is a BW unit obviously)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but just an observation.
yeah I agree, Reaper hate is surprising its a very well designed unit.
I'm also very surprised by the hate for the baneling. I think the baneling is a great unit. Its interactions with marines is one of the core elements that makes sc2 tvz so exciting to watch and play. Why would you get rid of it??? It has so many uses and it's one of those units that scales well with skill and exicution.
Im shocked though that any one would want to keep the brood lord like wth.
Glad to see we at least all agree that the swarmhost is a teribly desinged unit though
I dislike the reaper since it does nothing past the early game except suicide scout. Hellions have the exact same problem. Contrast this to the oracle, which is also a powerful early game harasser. Oracles have revelation, so you're strongly incentivized to keep at least one throughout the rest of the game. I'm surprised oracles are so disliked, I think they're a great design.
The baneling is like a disruptor: it either wins you games or you get nothing from them. The baneling coming so early is the reason why roach/hydra go unused in sc2. The sheer power banelings provide means other midgame options have to be weak to compensate.
I'm surprised to see roach so hated. I think providing a choice between a generalist ground/air attacker and a slightly stronger ground only attacker is a great design decision.
Ravens are a unit that just got designed out of the game. They're next to useless outside of TvT - I don't know what people see in them.
On September 04 2021 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote: God help anyone who voted yes to void ray.
Give me a void with the old charging mechanic and I might vote yes. I'm not sure if it would've been good for balance, but watching the pros develop amazing charge micro over the last decade would have been a lot of fun
Units that I'd like to see changed 1. Queen - way too overpowered in preventing most early aggression 2. Viper - don't like the abduct ability, feels like it messes up PvZ a bit too much
Terran 3. Reaper - don't like the fact that it's a unit that becomes completely obsolete once the early game is over
Toss 4. Shield batteries - overcharge is a bit too powerful in the early game (as armies have lower total DPS)
On September 04 2021 04:16 phodacbiet wrote: The more I vote no on units the more I realize I don't really like a lot of the units in sc2. I think the only unit I voted to keep was the reaper (with changes) because I like the unit's interaction. But other than that the rest seems meh. Most of the hero units should go, imo.
It seems my most controversial vote was on the swarm host ;p I voted "Maybe with some changes" since overall I actually quite like the idea of the unit. I just don't think Locusts should be free. Make each Locust cost something like 15 minerals, rebalance around that, and I think you have a serviceable unit.
On September 04 2021 01:20 Arceus wrote: It's been 10 years and everyone still hates the swarm host and nobody ever uses it besides the odd games. The single worst unit in the history of RTS?
There were some points in time when swarm hosts were an important part of the meta. And like you said, they still do get used occasionally. The Scout though? It's been unused since before the swarmhost was even invented. It wins worst unit hands down.
On September 04 2021 08:03 Solstice245 wrote: It seems my most controversial vote was on the swarm host ;p I voted "Maybe with some changes" since overall I actually quite like the idea of the unit. I just don't think Locusts should be free. Make each Locust cost something like 15 minerals, rebalance around that, and I think you have a serviceable unit.
It s hard to get a conclusion from this without a graphic, honestly i don t know why Hellbat are such in a terrible position while their design (like viking) is obviously fun and enjoyable. Then you can get two packs : Controversial units cause lack of design & integration in game (let s say at master level) : SwarmHost, Lurker, Cyclone, Widow mine, Adept, Disruptors And Tempest Controversial units among Air units : Viper*, Corruptor, Tempest, Liberator, Void Ray and MotherShip
Which would mean only Oracle and Ravager would be kept after HOTS and LOTV (why not Hellbat ?)
I don’t think units really matter all that much. Get the core down first.
What I wouldn’t do is give one race crazily microable units and leave the others to need power units or swarms to compensate. Warp gate necessitates a lot of trade offs that I don’t overly like either.
The races should play differently, but have roughly equivalent mechanical demands on them. Micro is fun too, to a point! When I play Terran I feel I’m having to micro way harder than my opponent, and playing Toss I’m feeling I don’t have enough opportunities to micro outside of the early game. I don’t think either is overly desirable.
If I was to remove units? Teleporting BCs would be one thing, but outside of that most individual units seem mostly OK to me. They wouldn’t necessarily resurface in the same faction, but fundamentally most seem good thru excellent RTS units with specific roles, weaknesses/strengths and flavour.
It s hard to get a conclusion from this without a graphic, honestly i don t know why Hellbat are such in a terrible position while their design (like viking) is obviously fun and enjoyable. Then you can get two packs : Controversial units cause lack of design & integration in game (let s say at master level) : SwarmHost, Lurker, Cyclone, Widow mine, Adept, Disruptors And Tempest Controversial units among Air units : Viper*, Corruptor, Tempest, Liberator, Void Ray and MotherShip
Which would mean only Oracle and Ravager would be kept after HOTS and LOTV (why not Hellbat ?)
except for the swarm host, the brood lord, and the infester I actually think the zerg roster is pretty well done in sc2. I think its mainly just that if in sc3 if we got a zerg with the same macro mechanics as sc2, I could see a very different unit roster fitting in and also being alot of fun. I think true to their lore zerg would be very adaptable to change. As long as you keep the zergling, keep the massed production of low supply units, keep lings, keep mutas, and maybe keep banes the zerg identity would carry into a new game. Thiers a lot of creative room to come up with cool new zerg units and mechanics.
As for the hellbat. I think the hellbat at least with how it works in sc2 kind of sucks, basically you make this unit vs zerg to allin them in the early stage of the game. Thats it for the most part, thier are a few other situations but due to thier slow speed, low range and poor cost effeceny, they realy are not all that usefull, at least in thier current form if they were to stay I would want significant number tweeks but honestly I would just want something different for terran. If its a new game we should get alot of new units, just keep the units and mechanics that have become core to the identy of each race. or have worked really well in sc2 to create fun and interesting gameplay.
With regards the viking, I would rather see ground to air be the predominant answer to air units for all races. Maybe give every race some kind of fighter unit like mutas, phonixes and wraiths and some big air unit that is vulnerable to its counters on the ground but that can abuse mobility. If we wanted to go more out thier I would really like to see bomber units like in command and conquer in an sc3. Air units that have a payload of attacks, and when they are out they have to go back to base, it might just not fit the far future theme of sc2 well though. But they have been really cool in other rts games. In general I just want the focus of interactions to remain on the ground for the majority of games, So I think if you put the best anti air on the ground it helps with that. Right now their comes a point where to fight the air you have to go air yourself which greatly contributes to the air deathball problem. Thier are a few exceptions to this like thors, and darks queen ultra infestor spore comp in zvp. But in general and for most of sc2 if your opponent massed air you also had to mass air which ruins the ground game in some matchups.
I think they could combine Firebats with Reapers and give them a midgame (tier 2.5) upgrade that makes them beefier and allows them to jump distances like Assault Space Marines from WH40k. They would be an option vs. Protoss when it comes to protecting Tank lines and possibly useful for sniping HTs. Against Terran, they could work like Zealot bombs, and versus Zerg they'd be potent at harassment and clearing creep, and maybe engaging Lurkers+Dark Swarm if it's back.
On September 05 2021 01:26 maybenexttime wrote: I think they could combine Firebats with Reapers and give them a midgame (tier 2.5) upgrade that makes them beefier and allows them to jump distances like Assault Space Marines from WH40k. They would be an option vs. Protoss when it comes to protecting Tank lines and possibly useful for sniping HTs. Against Terran, they could work like Zealot bombs, and versus Zerg they'd be potent at harassment and clearing creep, and maybe engaging Lurkers+Dark Swarm if it's back.
Yeah it s a very good sense of rework imo. I would remove the hellion in this way hellbat would be the upgrade of reaper. I m not sure if it s really better to give an ability to teleport because it will overlap with stalker and make Protoss lose a bit of consistency.
Imo the design of most of units in SC2 are good in term of background and interesting in term of uniqueness. It would be sad to see another ability paste from what already exist. Maybe extend the way on how the unit is made, i.e to cross maps, harass and escaping units..
Lol this pool really speaks for the quality of sc2's design, so many nos. People voting yes on the marauder, literally the worst designed RTS unit of all time, is really sad though.
There s an another contradiction with Banelings, It s easy to understand, if banelings are supposed to be stronger in mass number they must also follow a rule of a critical mass. Blizzard reach to make this part of the game amazing, but for pro only
if i could modify banelings I would suggest to have an enormous Banelings with 1 or 2 armor (to make things more smooth in term of critical mass), with a supply cost equal to one but enable to explode also and hurt friendly Banelings with his own acid in order to create a snowball effect in what we can call a 'killing spree' (?!). Once acid covers the ground, vapors will create an area where bio ennemies units receive low damage. In other hand, stimpack wouldn t be so strong, it means the speed of the units is only increased by 25% (for example)
It is the simpliest solution i ve found to resolve the baneling problem
Anyone played other more niche RTS games got some cool mechanics and ideas they’ve encountered for what could be in some, totally in development future SC3?
One of the rare minority who dislike mutalisk. Not that they're imbalanced, but they're just too usable as an air unit for all matchups (and basically kills off any diversity in ZvZ). Both in BW and SC2. Sure, they look cool with all the hit and run skirmishes. But the surprise element is not really surprising since they're so much easier to mass and attack (than say, a surprise hydra bust or lurker drop).
But I totally understand why the vast majority likes them pesky killer butterflies.
Still, don't remove mutalisks. Just make them weaker in their original form (and allow easier and cheaper tech to corruptors or broodlords). More of a transition unit. To boost early game anti-air, bring back SCORGU!!!
On September 05 2021 05:04 Lorch wrote: Lol this pool really speaks for the quality of sc2's design, so many nos. People voting yes on the marauder, literally the worst designed RTS unit of all time, is really sad though.
The only thing wrong with the Marauder is that it has a slow. Other than that, its basically just a different form of roach/dragoon/standard infantry unit, so I don't understand what makes it particularly different to warrant the title of the "worst designed RTS unit of all time", especially compared with other garbage that's in the game. I dont mind the marauder that much. In fact compared to BW, where infantry is only viable in one singular match up, i prefer it.
On September 05 2021 10:42 WombaT wrote: Anyone played other more niche RTS games got some cool mechanics and ideas they’ve encountered for what could be in some, totally in development future SC3?
I realy like how Air Works in the Red Alert three. They way they designed it is great, its very useful, but also not something that is the end all be all unit composition. I would love to see something like this brought into an sc3 since a major weekpoint of sc2 in my opinion is late game air deathballs.
In red alert three there are 3 things that make air units function so much better than in SC2.
1. every faction has a dedicated ground to air unit, these units in large enough numbers are always more cost efficient than the air they fight. This means that thier will always come a point where air cannot form the backbone of your army, its always useful though since it provides mobility. harassment and forces a response from your opponent.
2. Air units are generally split into two types 1, air units that hover constantly like sc2 air units such as helicopters or blimps )with the exception of (jet tangu which cant shoot down and are less powerful then other air units) these units get wrecked by anti air, or 2, air units that use the hanger system. In Red alert three their are fighters and bombers that require hangers, they have limited ammo, or bombs and so they have to return to their hanger after exhausting it. This lets these units feel like air in todays warfare, they go in do a huge amount of damage in a bombing run or fighter engagement, but have to return to base afterwards. This inherently discourages the air deathball, since the most powerful and cost efficient air units are designed for hit and run tactics and bursts of damage to key targets. It also creates windows were the air army is not present and the ground army can gain ground and push towards the hangers. This really helps to prevent the static d+air standoffs that are so common in sc2 ultra late game and creates a tug of war/battle of attrition interaction between an air and ground army.
I would really like to see a whole new approach to air units in an sc3 so that we don't get the bad late game deadlock that often happens in sc2. Maybe the fighter/bomber dynamic just does not make sense in a far future game where air units are spaceships, but i would really like a different system for air units that makes them temporary bursts of power instead of a constant looming deathball.
I really don't understand all the hate towards Brood Lords; I guess horribly designed Swarm Hosts have stained the concept of "free" units.
I think Brood Lords are among the most interesting units in the game, with clear strengths and weaknesses. They also function more like Siege Tanks than other air units- abusing map terrain, not negating it like most air units. I think "free" units are also probably the best way to do Zerg tier 3, keeping alive the swarm style while letting Zergs have some expensive individual units.
Honestly, I'd like to see the Swarm Host get a similar functionality, where they can only attack while being at risk of retaliation and thus requiring support around them. My dream for the SH is to be a proper tier 3 ranged unit, not a relatively cheesy individual attack force.
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
On September 05 2021 05:04 Lorch wrote: Lol this pool really speaks for the quality of sc2's design, so many nos. People voting yes on the marauder, literally the worst designed RTS unit of all time, is really sad though.
this community is full of people who think only them know the magical solution to create the perfect game that will instantly become the most popular one in the world while the professionals working in game design for years are a bunch of losers who will never be as competent as them. So I think this says more about the community than about the quality of sc2 design.
SC3 shouldn't borrow much of anything from SC2. I want the same magnitude of change we got jumping from Warcraft 2 to WarIII
Air Ground Underground / Burrowed
make burrowed units a core unit type, accompanied by fundamental changes to the top-down player perspective, terrain depth, sight / vision, minimap and detection. I imagine the TAB key would be used to switch from top-down air and ground perspective to a whole new underground battlefield. idk, maybe I've been playing too much WORMS
mines are awesome. I love mine-fields, booby traps, remote detonation (like the baneling), timed bombs and proximity detonation. hate widow mines though. it simply doesn't feel like a mine
I'd like to see the underground realm greatly expanded upon in SC3. I want the earth itself to be a resource that can be dug into vast tunnel networks. trees and lumber have a small impact in wc3. they free up space to build structures, create new pathways through the map, and there are some cool custom games like tree-tag that take this idea further. a reimagined nydus worm and mechanical drilling / tunneling units would be core to the gameplay
ledge-hopping units like reaper and colossus are interesting on paper, but the idea simply can't work to its fullest potential in sc2. I really loved the WoL campaign map that fills up with lava. ground units get fucked. I'd love to see a similar threat to air units, like dust-storms, and maybe even solar flares that would fuck up your mechanical / psionic units. sc2 is very strictly player vs player. I'm all for trying some player vs player vs environment, timed events, triggerable events. dustin browder was onto something with his destructable rock antics. maybe let that idea breathe a bit more instead of just being a sideshow like it is in sc2?
On September 07 2021 08:55 Draddition wrote: I really don't understand all the hate towards Brood Lords; I guess horribly designed Swarm Hosts have stained the concept of "free" units.
I think Brood Lords are among the most interesting units in the game, with clear strengths and weaknesses. They also function more like Siege Tanks than other air units- abusing map terrain, not negating it like most air units. I think "free" units are also probably the best way to do Zerg tier 3, keeping alive the swarm style while letting Zergs have some expensive individual units.
Honestly, I'd like to see the Swarm Host get a similar functionality, where they can only attack while being at risk of retaliation and thus requiring support around them. My dream for the SH is to be a proper tier 3 ranged unit, not a relatively cheesy individual attack force.
What's wrong about a unit which flies and denies movement on the ground, I wonder? The biggest hate for broodlord is that you can't walk through broodlings and kill them, you have to kill the broodlings but then there are others.
On September 07 2021 17:41 SHODAN wrote: SC3 shouldn't borrow much of anything from SC2. I want the same magnitude of change we got jumping from Warcraft 2 to WarIII
Air Ground Underground / Burrowed
make burrowed units a core unit type, accompanied by fundamental changes to the top-down player perspective, terrain depth, sight / vision, minimap and detection. I imagine the TAB key would be used to switch from top-down air and ground perspective to a whole new underground battlefield. idk, maybe I've been playing too much WORMS
mines are awesome. I love mine-fields, booby traps, remote detonation (like the baneling), timed bombs and proximity detonation. hate widow mines though. it simply doesn't feel like a mine
I'd like to see the underground realm greatly expanded upon in SC3. I want the earth itself to be a resource that can be dug into vast tunnel networks. trees and lumber have a small impact in wc3. they free up space to build structures, create new pathways through the map, and there are some cool custom games like tree-tag that take this idea further. a reimagined nydus worm and mechanical drilling / tunneling units would be core to the gameplay
ledge-hopping units like reaper and colossus are interesting on paper, but the idea simply can't work to its fullest potential in sc2. I really loved the WoL campaign map that fills up with lava. ground units get fucked. I'd love to see a similar threat to air units, like dust-storms, and maybe even solar flares that would fuck up your mechanical / psionic units. sc2 is very strictly player vs player. I'm all for trying some player vs player vs environment, timed events, triggerable events. dustin browder was onto something with his destructable rock antics. maybe let that idea breathe a bit more instead of just being a sideshow like it is in sc2?
Yeah, I like some of these ideas.
I don’t foresee future attempts to make the next big PvP RTS being as mechanically demanding as SC2 is, so the next generation could do with injecting some other mechanics to keep depth and give players things to think about.
Maps as it stands are basically battle arenas, they don’t feel or function like fields of war.
You could have different terrain types that regular troops move reasonably slowly or at full speed over, creating different paths. Do you cut paths through trees in advance to dig in defensive positions and meet it head on, or do you use a combination of skirmisher units and drop ships and set up a big giant flank? Your skirmish type units could be relatively weak vs stock combat troops, but be able to travel much faster over certain types of terrain.
Positioning in SC2 is important, but how you choose to get there is largely moot outside of what paths exist.
But yeah, I’ve seen more environmental stuff in other games and feel if it’s implemented in an intuitive manner it could add a lot of both depth, as well as variety too.
Maybe visibility changes that alters sight range and chance to hit with the weather. Or a day/night cycle or whatever. Charging an entrenched position with tanks in broad, clear daylight sees your Manlots massacred, but next game there’s a similar setup and your boys saunter through a sandstorm and you’re on top of your opponent’s position almost before they know you’re there. Maybe next game in your Bo3 your opponent gets the ‘sandstorm incoming’ warning and mines up the approach and you decide to reuse your tactic of charging through the sandstorm and most of your Zealots are separated into meaty chunks before they can get into contact with the enemy.
We’re both spitballing of course, no doubt if we were to be stuck in charge of some project it’d be awful, but as the core premise that the environment should actually do more to change gameplay I think is sound.
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: Very simple decision making process:
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
Eh, this would make the game worse.
1.-The Phoenix doesn't micro itself, and in fact it's very time consuming, that's why no one makes them agaisnt mutas. You have to constantly move them around and react quickly if mutas turn around and you simply cannot stop moving them. This means that while that is happening you cannot look away, at all. If you do and mutas turn around, the phoenixs continue moving forward and they get in range of the mutas and just die for example. And if you "a+click" the phoenix, they don't hit while moving (fun fact). It's so incredibly attention intensive that if you say they micro themselves it just tells me you've never used them.
2.-Stalker blink is one of the greatest abilities in the game, imo. Why would they remove it just because it has limitless potential? The ebtter you are the better you can get with it. In that case remove most micro units then and just have a game full of roaches. Bye marines! You can micro them.
Also, it's not that hard to balance. Stalkers suck. Specially in lotv. Stalkers don't scale well, and trade badly agaisn't every armored unit, except maybe the roach. There comes a point where even the best blink micro won't save you of your army just being destroyed. In WoL and HotS blink was more useful, since the early was longer the Stalker had a longer window of viability. In LotV, even with the stalker attack stat buff, we don't see that kind of blink micro almost ever anymore. Because the window of usefulness is much shorter (while still having it's uses, but more than "blink micro" is blink forward to snipe and backwards to run).
Furthermore, things like fungal stop stalkers from blinking. Force fields also have counterplay now with ravagers and you can put units in medivacs and save them, hence why they are barely used anymore. But I agree they were too strong in early expantions.
On September 07 2021 08:55 Draddition wrote: I really don't understand all the hate towards Brood Lords; I guess horribly designed Swarm Hosts have stained the concept of "free" units.
I think Brood Lords are among the most interesting units in the game, with clear strengths and weaknesses. They also function more like Siege Tanks than other air units- abusing map terrain, not negating it like most air units. I think "free" units are also probably the best way to do Zerg tier 3, keeping alive the swarm style while letting Zergs have some expensive individual units.
Honestly, I'd like to see the Swarm Host get a similar functionality, where they can only attack while being at risk of retaliation and thus requiring support around them. My dream for the SH is to be a proper tier 3 ranged unit, not a relatively cheesy individual attack force.
BL were a problem long before swarmhost. The worst meta of the game had swarmhost. The second worst was Brood Lord Infestor. But I agree they aren't as bad as they used to be with the new tools terran and toss have.
On September 03 2021 14:28 Zambrah wrote: I personally really hate Widow Mines, I have varying opinions on basically every other unit based on perceived strength vs. playability, but I really hate Widow Mines in particular for how swingy they are.
Me to. Also they are not mines.
On September 03 2021 23:55 RogerChillingworth wrote: Brood War would be a good starting point for sc3. Some kind of blending of the best ideas from both games might also work.
^-- This. There are some interesting BW units that might make a comeback over sc2 replacements. Science Vessel over Raven although maybe not with this mech-healing spell it has in campaign. Medics over medivacs because the idea of spaceship shooting healing ray down on people doesn't feel right. Vultures with Spider Mines are in my mind preferable to having hellions and widow mines. Plus hellions trasnformers option to become hellbat is horrible to me. Bring back hellbats. Defiler's felt a lot more fun than Viper are. Void rays feel really cool but I believe they should damage units in continuous way rather than in chunks (based on animations). Dark Archon making a comeback would be nice as well.
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: Very simple decision making process:
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
1. Phoenixes and auto-move shot I don’t really like, but they’re a really interesting harass unit. They need constant attention to do anything to ground forces, graviton also has some straight combat utility and can even save your own units, plus you have to pool energy and decide how to use it.
If anything at a core, non-balance sense just purely looking at the unit, I think the Phoenix is one of the most interesting and best-designed units (as a harasser). I don’t really like moving shot and the range increase, but that’s a balance thing as much to give Protoss a tool against mutas.
2 and 3. Doesn’t this basically cover well-controlled bio? There’s a whole slew of anti-bio measures, be they units or spells in the game, but it’s rarely a case of a player outmicroing the bio with their stock units.
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: Very simple decision making process:
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
Eh, this would make the game worse.
1.-The Phoenix doesn't micro itself, and in fact it's very time consuming, that's why no one makes them agaisnt mutas. You have to constantly move them around and react quickly if mutas turn around and you simply cannot stop moving them. This means that while that is happening you cannot look away, at all. If you do and mutas turn around, the phoenixs continue moving forward and they get in range of the mutas and just die for example. And if you "a+click" the phoenix, they don't hit while moving (fun fact). It's so incredibly attention intensive that if you say they micro themselves it just tells me you've never used them.
When I chase mutas with other mutas I can't just stay in range, I have to attack every single time
Phoenix you just have to keep in range, you can just use the mouse, don't even have to use the keyboard
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: Very simple decision making process:
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
Eh, this would make the game worse.
1.-The Phoenix doesn't micro itself, and in fact it's very time consuming, that's why no one makes them agaisnt mutas. You have to constantly move them around and react quickly if mutas turn around and you simply cannot stop moving them. This means that while that is happening you cannot look away, at all. If you do and mutas turn around, the phoenixs continue moving forward and they get in range of the mutas and just die for example. And if you "a+click" the phoenix, they don't hit while moving (fun fact). It's so incredibly attention intensive that if you say they micro themselves it just tells me you've never used them.
When I chase mutas with other mutas I can't just stay in range, I have to attack every single time
Phoenix you just have to keep in range, you can just use the mouse, don't even have to use the keyboard
Which I don’t overly like, it’s as much a problem with the muta as it is the Phoenix, which I think is one of the better-designed units in its other roles.
Protoss’ soft counters to mutas weren’t great even before they had their regen, now they are terrible. Which borderline necessitates a hard counter.
As many people here, I think using BW as a starting point would be a good idea. I think it's a better designed game in many ways. I'd say that the maps feeling a lot like battle arenas that WombaT mentioned is largely an SC2 thing. The terrain plays an important role in BW, with chokes, high ground or how exposed the mains/naturals are being central to how each map is played. There is more positional play and reinforcing your army is not as straightforward. I think SC3 should go in that direction - making terrain and logistics a key part of the game.
SC2 does have some cool mechanics and unit interactions, though, such as creep spread or Banelings vs. Marines to name a few. One thing I'd change about creep spread is making Creep Tumors visible but harder to kill (maybe not as hard as eggs, but hard). That would give the Terran players less incentive to scan creep randomly. I haven't followed SC2 that much since WoL, but from what I've noticed Baneling traps have become rarer as people got better at creep spread. There's just less room to hide your Banelings. I'd also remove Queens and make Drones build Creep Tumors instead and allow each Creep Tumor to make 2-3 new ones.
As for Terran, I think the race should go back to its roots. Positional play should play a central role again. I've noticed that it's much less common in SC2. The MUs also look much more similar to one another. In BW, the way Siege Tanks were used or positions secured was very different in each MU. In TvT you'd see Tank lines stretching across half of the map or stray Tanks deployed in key chokes/high grounds. In TvP you'd see Terran build entrenched positions with Tanks, Spider Mines, Depots, Turrets and even Bunkers or slowly push towards the enemy while covering the flanks with mines. In TvZ you'd play it similarly to SC2 - move as far as you can and siege up. Each race also had multiple ways of engaging those Terran positions or bypassing them.
There are some mechanics from other games that I'd like to see borrowed. Someone mentioned having two classes of air units - one with regular attack and another with a limited payload. I think that would mesh with Terran really well. Perhaps Banshees could be turned into such bombers. Their attack could be as strong as Yamato Cannon, but they'd have to go back to the Starport after each shot (maybe Starport could have multiple landing add-ons?). This would give the Terran the incentive to bring the Starports closer to the front line.
The unit that i hate the most is the Swarm Host. I definitely do not want to see it ever again. Then there is a package of units that i strongly do not like but maybe with heavy changes they might work but frankly, why even bother: Hellbats, cyclone, tempest, mothership, ravager, adept Next are units that i like but they need to be more or less reworked: queen, infestor, viper, sentry, void Ray, widow mine, corruptor, Thor, immortal, battlecruiser, roach, lurker, raven With rest i am mostly fine with some slight adjustments.
I also mostly kept Broodwar units and deleted SC2 ones, particularly protoss air and the more gimmicky new units. I'm a little torn on some of them though, as while I like watching pros using banelings and widow mines, I don't enjoy them at all in my own games, as the skill requirement is too high, which makes them frustrating.
One thing I love about SC2, which I hope gets more attention in future RTS games, is the amazing unit pathing and responsiveness. Controlling fast zerglings feels so, so good. They move like obedient, flowing water.
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: Very simple decision making process:
1. Is the unit microing itself? Then cut it. Example: phoenix with auto-shoot while moving. 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink 3. Does the unit prevent your opponent from being able to do anything? If there's no counter play other than "regret your choices" then it shouldn't be a thing. See: infestor, sentry
it's incredibly lucky in brood war the spell that prevents you from moving (maelstrom) is very expensive to use because the unit is 4 supply, and queen ensnare only slows you down so you CAN move a little bit at least
most annoying brood war spell is mind control, since as Zerg I have no counter play at the end of the game when minerals are running out, the protoss eventually will take over my army
Eh, this would make the game worse.
1.-The Phoenix doesn't micro itself, and in fact it's very time consuming, that's why no one makes them agaisnt mutas. You have to constantly move them around and react quickly if mutas turn around and you simply cannot stop moving them. This means that while that is happening you cannot look away, at all. If you do and mutas turn around, the phoenixs continue moving forward and they get in range of the mutas and just die for example. And if you "a+click" the phoenix, they don't hit while moving (fun fact). It's so incredibly attention intensive that if you say they micro themselves it just tells me you've never used them.
When I chase mutas with other mutas I can't just stay in range, I have to attack every single time
Phoenix you just have to keep in range, you can just use the mouse, don't even have to use the keyboard
Yeah but Pheonix also explode if anything toutch them, you have to anticipate the movements of the mutalisk to stay just in the sweet spot while the zerg can try to cut back and jump on you/create a hole.
It's way more micro to win a pheonix vs mutmut fight than to chase down a smaller pack of mutalisk with more muta where all you gotta do is spam a-click and the other can do jack shit.
On September 15 2021 08:29 [Phantom] wrote: I'm curious. Why do people not like the tempest?
I think the way SCII works with its economy is just BS to be frank. Tempest scale very well in the mid game. In the late game they just seem like a boring unit only used for posture and pokes. Coming out of the Fleet Beacon, I expect my flagship units like the Carrier and Tempest to wreck havoc and to have a mean bite. Most eSport players use them very strategically and I think they (the game developers) need to improve them for a more entertaining appeal.
On September 15 2021 08:29 [Phantom] wrote: I'm curious. Why do people not like the tempest?
I think people are voting based on the units within SC2, and not on a unit conceptually.
I think there’s some potential in a slow moving, long range single target ship that requires a spotter for maximum range, although I don’t particularly like how it functions within SC2.
Also for iconic status, for having defined big strengths and weaknesses the siege tank is just a better RTS unit if we’re going to have overlap I’d rather keep the tank excelling.
My issue with SC2 lurkers as well.
How the units actually function in SC2 with SC2 econ and meta etc, I’m less concerned with. Does it have a niche and promote play/counterplay? Does it have clear strengths and weaknesses?
I’d be fine with swapping abilities or even units across races too.
I think Phoenixes are at their core, great and probably my favourite SC2 unit on that level. You need more than one to attack ground, you have to manually lift units. There’s a trade off between killing more drones and pooling energy for later. You can lift priority targets, save your own units, mine drag etc.
Phoenix heavy metas in PvP and PvT sucked, but that wasn’t really an issue with the Phoenix.
Of units that I think have outright sucked, quite a small list. Thors have always been annoyingly clunky, and not in a way that feels part of a trade off, like tanks sieging and unsieging. Just big, annoying to move around and have been worked and reworked so many times. Now they’re in a niche where they either annihilate enemy air if they get close enough, or do nothing whatsoever.
Infestors of the Wings variety, just way too good. Swarm hosts and tortuous, tortuous stalemates.
Colossus used to be bloody good but it’s problem for me was it’s hybrid ground/air status. Forced so many games where over/underbuilding hard counter Vikings/corrupters determined the outcome. On the other hand it’s cliff-walking ability is neat and could be made interesting, if the map terrain was more varied. Maybe an SC3 Collosus gets a range boost if it climbs terrain, but makes it then become vulnerable to anti-air attacks, so there’s some more jostling for position on the map.
Argh this turned way more TLDR than I intended, but I think the core toolkit in terms of unit design is pretty good.
How it all actually works with eco, maps and numbers is quite another thing though!
I really don't care much about which units are kept (although i agree with you that some units are core to each race). I care more about the gameplay being more like Broodwar (but without being Broodwar).
Now, it's hard to make SC3 feel like Broodwar without taking some steps back. Big part of Broodwar balancing and gameplay was stuff like it was harder to ball/clump units, the limited control (12 units or 1 building max at the same time) etc. Some of these things are not gonna make a return no matter what, because it would feel like going back to playing a game with bad controls. But I'm wondering if there's some ways you could bridge the gap in the gameplay and map design.
On September 16 2021 02:26 Athinira wrote: I really don't care much about which units are kept (although i agree with you that some units are core to each race). I care more about the gameplay being more like Broodwar (but without being Broodwar).
Now, it's hard to make SC3 feel like Broodwar without taking some steps back. Big part of Broodwar balancing and gameplay was stuff like it was harder to ball/clump units, the limited control (12 units or 1 building max at the same time) etc. Some of these things are not gonna make a return no matter what, because it would feel like going back to playing a game with bad controls. But I'm wondering if there's some ways you could bridge the gap in the gameplay and map design.
I agree that anything that’s related to a UI restriction would be unlikely to be re-introduced, like a 12 unit selection.
I think there’s other ways around this. Units could naturally spread, and spread more the more are selected in one group, which could have uses in auto-spreading certain units, but equally would make it advantageous to spread your unit selections across multiple control units vs all army.
If BW is a battle to effectively collect your forces together in clumps, SC2 is a battle of spreading them to counteract their tendency to clump.
1Aing your entire army should be easy and painless to do, equally I think the player who’s working with 3/4 control groups should have more of an advantage from doing so.
But yeah I think other interesting dynamics with the impact of terrain etc can add some complexity and things to strategise and tactically outfox your opponent without reverting to UI restrictions. SC2 didn’t really do much in this domain so I think any sequel should probably consider it.
On September 15 2021 08:29 [Phantom] wrote: I'm curious. Why do people not like the tempest?
I think the way SCII works with its economy is just BS to be frank. Tempest scale very well in the mid game. In the late game they just seem like a boring unit only used for posture and pokes. Coming out of the Fleet Beacon, I expect my flagship units like the Carrier and Tempest to wreck havoc and to have a mean bite. Most eSport players use them very strategically and I think they (the game developers) need to improve them for a more entertaining appeal.
He has a little bit more of dps than a marine under adrealine but his supply cost is 5x times superior. I like the concept of a very long range siege unit inside a protoss army (even if i think disruptor must receive some tweaks a little bit) but it s not compatible with the almighty strenght of the golden armada, even if corruptors or vikings are far away a cost effective unit.
Thus curiously, Tempest has only bonus against air massive units and he s not specialized against armored (?)
I think in an utopist SC3 they could attack like hellions, burning everything in a straight line behind the targeted unit (add kind of splash damage), but actually it s not reasonable because of the strenght of the golden armada
Then i would probably remove the corruptor by the voyd ray design, cause corruptors is a broken unit. The concept of Void ray Unit could be interesting in the zerg race, as a good alternative to mutalisks which are fast and good at harassing (while corruptors has nothing special)
On September 07 2021 13:26 iopq wrote: 2. Can an AI win with a thousand APM microing this unit? Then it's too powerful with micro and hard to balance. Example: stalker blink
Zerglings imba.
one million APM won't make zerglings kill a terran behind a depot depot barracks wall
On September 27 2021 04:31 mindjames wrote: Sorry if it's been noted already, but it's kind of an odd choice to have a poll that excludes some options because of some vague idea of "core units".
Bro you will only take my Manlots away from my cold, dead hands.
On September 27 2021 04:31 mindjames wrote: Sorry if it's been noted already, but it's kind of an odd choice to have a poll that excludes some options because of some vague idea of "core units".
OP:Which units would you remove or keep? But lets keep the discussion outside of units i like.
On September 27 2021 04:31 mindjames wrote: Sorry if it's been noted already, but it's kind of an odd choice to have a poll that excludes some options because of some vague idea of "core units".
OP:Which units would you remove or keep? But lets keep the discussion outside of units i like.
To be clear, what I put in as "core" units are not units I like. Just units I considered to be race defining in both gameplay and lore. Some are more important for gameplay, some lore. Also I considered that each race should have defining units in Ground and Air.
Zergling: It's the "swarm" unit. Two at a time, builds fast, moves fast, melee atack. Hydralisk: It's literally the unit shown when you pick the race. Probably the most iconic zerg unit. It's literally the Zerg mascot for any merchandise, appears in all zerg cinematics etc. It is the main ground to air anti air of the race. Used since sc1. Mutalisk: Same as the Hydralisk but for air. Interesting concept and micro potential. Ultralisk: Ultimate zerg ground unit. Appears in both games, important lore wise, cinematic wise etc. Overlord: Zerg core mechanic since sc1. It gives supply and it's also important lorewise too as it's what enables control of more units of the Swarm.
Terran: Marine: I'd say the whole terran race, and maybe the whole game is made around this unit. It's important gameplay and lorewise, it's the race mascot. Some form of Medic. I was ambiguos here but being able to heal units it's an important gameplay differentiator for Terran. Ghost. One of the most iconic units (nuclear launch detected), important gameplay wise (EMP) and VERY important lore wise. Siege Tank. Alongside the Marine, this unit basically defines terran. One of the most interesting and well designed units in RTS. Battle Cruiser. It's the terran capital ship. Super iconic. I don't like it having it blink, but that doesn't mean it's not the flagship Air Terran unit.
Protoss: Zealot: All protoss gameplay is based around this unit. It must exit for lore reasons. High Templar: Again, it must exist for lore reasons. Also Psi Storm is a core part of protoss gameplay and identity. Dark Templar: Must exist for lore reasons. Fills an important gameplay niche in the protoss army. Permanent cloak and cloack fields are a defining Protoss trait since BW. Archon: If HT and DT exist, Archon must exist. Carrier: Protoss Air Flagsip. Important for lore reasons, used competitively in both BW and Sc2. "The Golden Armada" is an important aspect of protoss identity, and the core of it is the carrier. Observer: I guess you could argue this one, but I don't think anyone really has any problem with the observer.
And again, it doesn't mean I like the units, or that they should not change some aspects/abilities. If Blizz makes sc3 I pray to god they remove BC blink. However I don't think removing the BC itself would be good.
That being said, I'm not Blizzard, and they did rework/remove units from sc1->sc2 that I would have considered important or iconic like the Dragoon (although you could argue the Stalker is a dragoon that you can micro), or the firebat (although again, the Hellbat). So if you have any argument agaisnt or in favor of those units I'd love to discuss it!
On September 16 2021 02:26 Athinira wrote: I really don't care much about which units are kept (although i agree with you that some units are core to each race). I care more about the gameplay being more like Broodwar (but without being Broodwar).
Now, it's hard to make SC3 feel like Broodwar without taking some steps back. Big part of Broodwar balancing and gameplay was stuff like it was harder to ball/clump units, the limited control (12 units or 1 building max at the same time) etc. Some of these things are not gonna make a return no matter what, because it would feel like going back to playing a game with bad controls. But I'm wondering if there's some ways you could bridge the gap in the gameplay and map design.
I agree that anything that’s related to a UI restriction would be unlikely to be re-introduced, like a 12 unit selection.
I think there’s other ways around this. Units could naturally spread, and spread more the more are selected in one group, which could have uses in auto-spreading certain units, but equally would make it advantageous to spread your unit selections across multiple control units vs all army.
If BW is a battle to effectively collect your forces together in clumps, SC2 is a battle of spreading them to counteract their tendency to clump.
1Aing your entire army should be easy and painless to do, equally I think the player who’s working with 3/4 control groups should have more of an advantage from doing so.
But yeah I think other interesting dynamics with the impact of terrain etc can add some complexity and things to strategise and tactically outfox your opponent without reverting to UI restrictions. SC2 didn’t really do much in this domain so I think any sequel should probably consider it.
One of the big things to help out would be the BW economy (e.g. being able to super saturate bases, few workers at start), high ground advantages (miss chance) alongside the anti clump mechanic you described. Obviously you'd have to buff splash damage accordingly.
Unfortunately I do agree that any UI stuff, like a cap on control groups, likely will never come back. Maybe there is a place for other artificial limitations though? Like only being able to select ground units together, or barracks units etc. Maybe just be able to select the same type of building together? Anything that pushes the game more in a mechanical direction is desperatly needed imo.
On September 16 2021 02:26 Athinira wrote: I really don't care much about which units are kept (although i agree with you that some units are core to each race). I care more about the gameplay being more like Broodwar (but without being Broodwar).
Now, it's hard to make SC3 feel like Broodwar without taking some steps back. Big part of Broodwar balancing and gameplay was stuff like it was harder to ball/clump units, the limited control (12 units or 1 building max at the same time) etc. Some of these things are not gonna make a return no matter what, because it would feel like going back to playing a game with bad controls. But I'm wondering if there's some ways you could bridge the gap in the gameplay and map design.
I agree that anything that’s related to a UI restriction would be unlikely to be re-introduced, like a 12 unit selection.
I think there’s other ways around this. Units could naturally spread, and spread more the more are selected in one group, which could have uses in auto-spreading certain units, but equally would make it advantageous to spread your unit selections across multiple control units vs all army.
If BW is a battle to effectively collect your forces together in clumps, SC2 is a battle of spreading them to counteract their tendency to clump.
1Aing your entire army should be easy and painless to do, equally I think the player who’s working with 3/4 control groups should have more of an advantage from doing so.
But yeah I think other interesting dynamics with the impact of terrain etc can add some complexity and things to strategise and tactically outfox your opponent without reverting to UI restrictions. SC2 didn’t really do much in this domain so I think any sequel should probably consider it.
One of the big things to help out would be the BW economy (e.g. being able to super saturate bases, few workers at start), high ground advantages (miss chance) alongside the anti clump mechanic you described. Obviously you'd have to buff splash damage accordingly.
Unfortunately I do agree that any UI stuff, like a cap on control groups, likely will never come back. Maybe there is a place for other artificial limitations though? Like only being able to select ground units together, or barracks units etc. Maybe just be able to select the same type of building together? Anything that pushes the game more in a mechanical direction is desperatly needed imo.
I dissagree. The key is finding the balance. SC2 is already too hard. They need to find a way to make it easier and more accesible, withouth making it super dumbed down.
Of units that I think have outright sucked, quite a small list. Thors have always been annoyingly clunky, and not in a way that feels part of a trade off, like tanks sieging and unsieging. Just big, annoying to move around and have been worked and reworked so many times. Now they’re in a niche where they either annihilate enemy air if they get close enough, or do nothing whatsoever.
Last time Thors were cool was when Jinro's Thors countered MC's Immortals. But late game they are there mostly to counter mass mutalisks - a function that was just better served by Valkyries.
On September 16 2021 01:13 WombaT wrote:
Colossus used to be bloody good but it’s problem for me was it’s hybrid ground/air status. Forced so many games where over/underbuilding hard counter Vikings/corrupters determined the outcome. On the other hand it’s cliff-walking ability is neat and could be made interesting, if the map terrain was more varied. Maybe an SC3 Collosus gets a range boost if it climbs terrain, but makes it then become vulnerable to anti-air attacks, so there’s some more jostling for position on the map.
I think the problem with colossus was also that they invited protoss deathball tactic as Colossus could have all other units under them. As much as BW reavers required a lot more micro, they were more entertaining by far.
Man going over this post the number of times I clicked "no"... SC2 never really managed to make any new iconic units that would be indispensable in future iterations, save a couple on each race. Maybe the baneling, stalker, and medivac. Other than that, burn it to the ground if it wasn't in BW for all I care.
A little side tracking but, I want the new game to be specifically balanced for each match-up, with race specific counter bonuses. I don't really understand why the balance team was stubborn keeping units the same stats in different match ups. Balancing would have been so much easier. Also instead of months of interval between patches, frequent patches adjusting unit stats by +1 or -1 values until the statistics show varied unit usage across the board.
On December 19 2021 02:07 highsis wrote: A little side tracking but, I want the new game to be specifically balanced for each match-up, with race specific counter bonuses. I don't really understand why the balance team was stubborn keeping units the same stats in different match ups. Balancing would have been so much easier. Also instead of months of interval between patches, frequent patches adjusting unit stats by +1 or -1 values until the statistics show varied unit usage across the board.
There's already a lot of that. +damage to shields only effects protoss, +bio on spore crawlers can only effect zerg, etc.
On December 18 2021 06:25 VelRa_G wrote: Man going over this post the number of times I clicked "no"... SC2 never really managed to make any new iconic units that would be indispensable in future iterations, save a couple on each race. Maybe the baneling, stalker, and medivac. Other than that, burn it to the ground if it wasn't in BW for all I care.
Half of Brood War’s iconic units would be super broken with the SC UI
The rest are just stock RTS units. Zerglings are just speedy, fragile but potentially devastating melee skirmishers. Zealots are manly tanks with mind blades you can run through mines and suicide attack drag, or drop them from spaceships on to tanks.
Come to think of it Zealots have it pretty rough.
An RTS lives and breathes on cool unit interactions, not on the units themselves being cool, just how it works.
I personally love Phoenixes, they’re one of my favourite RTS units ever. But they have such a niche use, and when they weren’t niche they were part of some bad metas, like Phoenix wars in PvP
The unit itself is solid though
Actually going through the units, there’s a lot of good, interesting units.
BW may be a better game due to, about 3 huge factors independent of the actual unit sets, depending on one’s tastes, I don’t think it’s outright due to the units
I think people’s voting in this, in many instances is just influenced by the game state and not the units themselves, which is understandable but wrong I believe.
On December 19 2021 02:07 highsis wrote: A little side tracking but, I want the new game to be specifically balanced for each match-up, with race specific counter bonuses. I don't really understand why the balance team was stubborn keeping units the same stats in different match ups. Balancing would have been so much easier. Also instead of months of interval between patches, frequent patches adjusting unit stats by +1 or -1 values until the statistics show varied unit usage across the board.
There's already a lot of that. +damage to shields only effects protoss, +bio on spore crawlers can only effect zerg, etc.
Theres only exactly 3 instances of that, not a lot (WM +shield bonus, EMP depleting shields and spores)
Of units that I think have outright sucked, quite a small list. Thors have always been annoyingly clunky, and not in a way that feels part of a trade off, like tanks sieging and unsieging. Just big, annoying to move around and have been worked and reworked so many times. Now they’re in a niche where they either annihilate enemy air if they get close enough, or do nothing whatsoever.
Last time Thors were cool was when Jinro's Thors countered MC's Immortals. But late game they are there mostly to counter mass mutalisks - a function that was just better served by Valkyries.
The fact that the Liberators AtA attack is so bad now people don't ever unsiege them in fights was the biggest crime against the unit, altough I understand them being good vs both air and ground was too much, I still liked it better when you could use them instead of thors.
On December 19 2021 02:07 highsis wrote: A little side tracking but, I want the new game to be specifically balanced for each match-up, with race specific counter bonuses. I don't really understand why the balance team was stubborn keeping units the same stats in different match ups. Balancing would have been so much easier. Also instead of months of interval between patches, frequent patches adjusting unit stats by +1 or -1 values until the statistics show varied unit usage across the board.
There's already a lot of that. +damage to shields only effects protoss, +bio on spore crawlers can only effect zerg, etc.
Theres only exactly 3 instances of that, not a lot (WM +shield bonus, EMP depleting shields and spores)
Of units that I think have outright sucked, quite a small list. Thors have always been annoyingly clunky, and not in a way that feels part of a trade off, like tanks sieging and unsieging. Just big, annoying to move around and have been worked and reworked so many times. Now they’re in a niche where they either annihilate enemy air if they get close enough, or do nothing whatsoever.
Last time Thors were cool was when Jinro's Thors countered MC's Immortals. But late game they are there mostly to counter mass mutalisks - a function that was just better served by Valkyries.
The fact that the Liberators AtA attack is so bad now people don't ever unsiege them in fights was the biggest crime against the unit, altough I understand them being good vs both air and ground was too much, I still liked it better when you could use them instead of thors.
they are still good against Interceptors and theoretically against Mutas even though it's not practical to use them as Muta defense
On December 19 2021 02:07 highsis wrote: A little side tracking but, I want the new game to be specifically balanced for each match-up, with race specific counter bonuses. I don't really understand why the balance team was stubborn keeping units the same stats in different match ups. Balancing would have been so much easier. Also instead of months of interval between patches, frequent patches adjusting unit stats by +1 or -1 values until the statistics show varied unit usage across the board.
The whole game is full of hardcounters ,what we really don't need are even harder hard counters. The whole history of SC2 can be named - how designers are stubborn and refuse to fix design flaws and rather go around them with hardcounters.
BL Imba -> Tempest Muta Imba -> Phoenix, Phoenix range, Thor, Thor AI, spore, mine Chargelot Imba -> mines armored units Imba -> Immortal Force field imba -> Ravager early game imba -> Mothership core, MSC imba -> battery -> early game still imba -> battery overcharge marines imba -> Adept Protoss imba -> EMP
And that's just patches and what I remember.
Had the game been built on better foundations we wouldn't be in this mess.
EPT
