|
On November 10 2007 01:28 Psycs wrote:
I have been thinking of a spell for a zerg magic caster, like a queen.
It would be a medium area-of-effect spell that would affect enemies of friendly units. Once cast the targets units would be buffed (either increases attack, defense, speed, or a combination thereof) for a short duration of time (maybe 15 secs. or so). The downside is that when the effect ends, the units would have their health reduced to 1 hp or become 1-hit kills.
This could either be used defensively of aggressively. If cast on your units it would be very powerful for certain strategic attacks. If used on the enemy, it could reduce their health (great against a slow terran push, for example). But be very careful, if you miss calculate, the buffed units could kick your arse back to GG.
However, it might be a little imbalanced if used together with dark swarm.
Sounds like something from a fantasy game, not a sci-fi game like SC.
|
On November 10 2007 01:56 shimmy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2007 01:28 Psycs wrote:
I have been thinking of a spell for a zerg magic caster, like a queen.
It would be a medium area-of-effect spell that would affect enemies of friendly units. Once cast the targets units would be buffed (either increases attack, defense, speed, or a combination thereof) for a short duration of time (maybe 15 secs. or so). The downside is that when the effect ends, the units would have their health reduced to 1 hp or become 1-hit kills.
This could either be used defensively of aggressively. If cast on your units it would be very powerful for certain strategic attacks. If used on the enemy, it could reduce their health (great against a slow terran push, for example). But be very careful, if you miss calculate, the buffed units could kick your arse back to GG.
However, it might be a little imbalanced if used together with dark swarm. Sounds like something from a fantasy game, not a sci-fi game like SC.
Hu? sounds like extreme stim pack to me.
EDIT: a nice way to implement it could be to call it a drop of adrenal glands. Taking bodies to full potential but leaving units exhausted phisically.
However this sounds overpowered in a 2v2 use with MnM. 
|
Yeah sounds like AOE stim packs.
As for your comment about being able to go to obs mode after you lose a team game, in warcraft 3, you technically dont lose until all your teammates are dead. So if your base gets wiped out, you are still in the game, you just dont have any units to control unless your ally gives you unit control. Im going to assume this will continue onto Starcraft 2 as well.
As for resource sharing. Like someone else mentioned earlier, its not so much about the fast ling rushes, its more about the slingshotting of tech. If somone could have mutas while everyone else is still sitting in tier one, its going to be almost impossible to stop them from doing massive damage.
|
On November 10 2007 02:40 Fen wrote:
As for your comment about being able to go to obs mode after you lose a team game, in warcraft 3, you technically dont lose until all your teammates are dead. So if your base gets wiped out, you are still in the game, you just dont have any units to control unless your ally gives you unit control. Im going to assume this will continue onto Starcraft 2 as well.
throws himself against the wall repetively.
EDIT: well it shows how much interest for w3 I had.
Considering once again the ressource donating system. If you make it an upgrade high in the tech tree isn't the problem solved? Basically if you look at AOE2 TC it is the way they go and the tech tree is at least as important as in SC2 particularly the age evolution thing.
The only thing is that it may become a major issue of 2v2 with heavy macro games to be able to use at best this feat. But I think it can be set up without being to much of a problem.
|
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea, it's like having MBS with an upgrade or some other game/UI mechanic.
It should have a percent tax and/or a time restriction and this will be enough to prevent abuses.
|
On November 10 2007 03:16 lololol wrote:
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea
Could you develop on this?
I don't really see the link with the MBS thing.
This could be seen as a trading system it is not necessrily a game mechanic.
|
I've had the notion of "infantry-only" ramps floating in my head for some time. Not just narrow passages, but specific "elevator" type doodads, like the doors and caves from BW. They could be limited to specific sizes and allow passage to a set number of units, maybe even one at a time, per a set time period. Even if there is no size limit, the doodad can still put a low ceiling on the rate of
troop movement up or down the cliff. Better yet, it can be destructible - essentially the opposite of mineral-blocked ramps on Gaia. I think it would create a lot of interesting tactical choices, without giving an impression of playing at a "theme park", as someone complained neutral buildings made them feel in C&C.
On November 09 2007 18:14 LoveandPeace wrote:
4- make line of sight so that units see what is in front of them and to their side, and almost nothing behind them. This opens up room for microing troop movement and taking advantage of sloppy troop movement. also means that scouting units like obs should use the patrol command, so when they change directions, they can see 2x as much as when they don't change directions. finally, something useful for the patrol command to do.
Oh my...
Sounds fun as all hell, but somewhat impractical: how many units can a player really baby-sit? Then again, when you have a standing army, the units all end up facing different directions... if you're lucky. This makes room for vast quantities of micro: when "camping" a force, you'll benefit from putting "sentries" in all directions. Not to mention the Patrol command finally gaining a function, as someone else pointed out. I can see the map being alive with expo-surveying SCVs, Marine patrols and sneaky, Boxer-esque raid parties. Very nice. 
Maybe make it so certain units get an "old fashioned" LOS: Observers and capital ships come to mind. This also opens up the lane of BCs being able to shoot in all directions without turning... but that's an idea for another time and another thread.
Here's what I think: the feature adds a lot of depth to the game, perhaps too much so, but it also adds a great deal of excitement to players and observers alike. Put it in the map editor and see what happens.
|
I have an idea I want to hear peoples opinion about, so here it goes.
In SC1 shield batteries are almost never used in the pro scene, so I was thinking about giving it an extra ability besides recharging the protoss shields. It could use its energy to create a energy ball (like the motherships time bomb) that has the same affect as a Terran bunker. You could put one (or more) units inside and the energy shield would take the damage from enemy fire, while your units could kill units from the outside.
For balancing issues the shield battery will lose energy while the energy ball is up, and when it is out of energy the energy ball will be gone. Also when the energy ball takes damage the energy of the shield battery is lost also. Enemy mele units can just walk inside the energy ball and kill the units inside (just like in a dark swarm)
However I do think this idea need some modification, and was hoping someone could give me some input. And I do hope this was the right thread to put this idea in
|
On November 10 2007 07:11 boudiou wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2007 03:16 lololol wrote:
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea Could you develop on this? I don't really see the link with the MBS thing. This could be seen as a trading system it is not necessrily a game mechanic.
How does the term "trading system" you just made up, somehow translates to resource trading suddenly becoming something different that a game mechanic?
It's just plain wrong to upgrade the player's abilities to interact with the game and not the actual units/buildings/abilities that are part of the gameplay, it doesn't fit and is a bad idea and the gameplay doesn't benefit at all, it can only suffer from abuses or have an upgrade with no use in high level games(not to mention that it will never be researched in a 1v1 and you'll have an upgrade sitting there with ABSOLUTELY no use).
Or what about upgrading minimap ping, or ally chat, or building rally points? They could too be seen as "Minimap ping system" and "Ally chat system" and "Rally point system".
|
This is a crazy random thought that just a popped in my head since im reeeeaaaally bored right now. (I think someone has mentioned this once...somewhere...But anyways here it is)
Lets have a Zerg unit that is like a spawner (necromancer from wc3...?). It can make units from dead corpses, but also infect living units and turn them into zerg units (kinda like brooodling but more variety). Maybe it can also consume your own units and make even stronger units from the consumed/sacrificed ones. Or it can simply be a special mobile hatch that makes only certain units.
lets also have a zerg ability to eat/drink/absorb vespene gas and then it can do some powerful attack, like the Destroyer from WC3 special attack i guess. I was thinking about mutalisks from the demo anyways. (maybe have different special attacks for each zerg unit?).
Oh and since terran can sell buildings, lets allow zerg to sell units. Just send units back to some thingy and you will get back some of your money. I'd also like hatcheries to be able to upgrade and get more larva, so maybe every tiems you upgrade to the next tier for the hatch you get one more larva, or just have some separate upgrade.
And i think mnm mentioned something about a succubus zerg unit when news of SC2 JUST came out. It was like parasite, but eventually it would give control of the unit infected to the zerg or something along those lines. Im not to crazy about this since the protoss have mind control (well in broodwar anyways...) and would make the races a little less unique, but i guess how the mechanics work are different.
|
I would like zergs ability to infest buildings become a little bit more of a gameplay mechanic than it was in starcraft 1.
Suggested changes:
- Queens infest buildings when they are damaged (ok not a change, just something Id like to keep). The infestation however only lasts as long as the queen stays in the building. If a player tells a queen to leave the building, it will revert control back to the original player after a short while.
- When a building is infested, it produces creep and larva at a slower rate than hatcheries.
- When creep reaches an enemy building, it begins to damage it (not at an extremely fast rate, probs at the same rate as a terran building burning). Unit of course are not harmed by creep.
This would make infesting a viable tactic instead of just getting an interesting new unit. An infestation would have to be dealt with by the enemy. If one of your buildings were infected, then you would have to route your forces to that area, because if you dont, the enemy now has a larva producing structure in your base and will be able to spawn units ground zero. It also is producing creep that is doing proximity damage to the surrounding buildings. For zerg players, it gives them an option, where if they wipe out an expansion, they can infest instead of destroy, giving them the advantage of more larva production, the ability to quickly build up defensive structures without having to wait for the length of time it takes to build a hatchery. Or if they wanna humiliate their opponents, they can infest an entire base 
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 10 2007 03:16 lololol wrote:
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea, it's like having MBS with an upgrade or some other game/UI mechanic.
It should have a percent tax and/or a time restriction and this will be enough to prevent abuses.
Hm, I don't see how resource trading is anything at all similiar to MBS. I don't mind it in the game (especially since I've never really been a 2v2er), but requiring a "trading post" or "Hive connection", or whatever you want to name it, to trade resources doesn't sound unreasonable.
|
On November 11 2007 01:29 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2007 07:11 boudiou wrote:On November 10 2007 03:16 lololol wrote:
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea Could you develop on this? I don't really see the link with the MBS thing. This could be seen as a trading system it is not necessrily a game mechanic. How does the term "trading system" you just made up, somehow translates to resource trading suddenly becoming something different that a game mechanic? It's just plain wrong to upgrade the player's abilities to interact with the game and not the actual units/buildings/abilities that are part of the gameplay, it doesn't fit and is a bad idea and the gameplay doesn't benefit at all, it can only suffer from abuses or have an upgrade with no use in high level games(not to mention that it will never be researched in a 1v1 and you'll have an upgrade sitting there with ABSOLUTELY no use). Or what about upgrading minimap ping, or ally chat, or building rally points? They could too be seen as "Minimap ping system" and "Ally chat system" and "Rally point system".
Take it easy dude.
When I used "trading system" I assumed it was an upgrade. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.
It could have another function just like the market in AoE has (but not necessarily the same).
If it is an upgrade it is not a game mechanic is it? (I am sorry I don't feel very comfortable with the term game mechanic it sounds just too vast to me but this may be my english skills).
Anyway I do agree that a point blank ressource trading would be risky balance wise. And I am just giving ideas on a way to implement it.
And when you say it is bad/no benefit it just your opinion, and you speak like it was obvious truth.
Say you don't like that idea or convince me with some kind of analysis.
|
Of course it's bad having an pointless upgrade that just sits there and has no use in 1v1 games, ain't it obvious?
Blizz are aiming to not have anything useless and you're like "it's okay if we add useless things" or you're gonna argue it's only one upgrade and it's not several upgrades, so it's "different" and breaking the principles/maxims of good design "just a little" is fine, when they obviously have other solutions, which are not adding an option you'll never use in 1v1 games(and will actually be detrimental to your game if you research it)?
If you want options, time and/or tax restrictions can easily solve the abuses and they are not adding any useless option to 1v1 games. Also, tax is much more realistic than a one type payment for trading.
If you still can't imagine why uselss things are bad, then imagine them on a larger scale, like the CnC style gameplay mass tank vs tank battles with everything else mostly useless, you can even say it's balanced, lol. Even on a smaller scale adding bad things doesn't suddeny make them good.
And wtf is with that take it easy? Did I hit you or something  I'm perfectly calm and if you have a different impression, it's most certainly wrong(as obvious english is not my native language).
|
New zerg units (because critters are fun to come up with):
Zerg Matriarch
Size: L
HP: High
Attack: Medium melee.
Movement: Medium (Hover)
Energy: 200 (Upgrade 250, starts with 50)
Tech: About queen equivilant.
Role: Support spell caster, ligth melee combat unit.
Spells:
Hatch Broodling (Avalible from start, cost 10)
The Matriarch hatches a broodling, a small basic zerg unit. The broodling is fairly weak and cannot sustain itself, the only thing keeping it together is the energy imbued by the Matriarch. It will die on it's own after 30 seconds.
Spells has toggle, when on Matriarch will continually spawn new broodlings untill energy runs out. Spell has a casting time of 2 seconds.
Launch Broodling (Upgrade of Hatch Broodling)
The Matriarch can launch spores a long distance and thus hatch broodlings far away from the Matriarch.
Range 10+?
Nourishment: Activated ability. Regenerates zerg units around it exactly like a shield battery regenerates protoss shields, only automatically and distributed evenly over all nearby units.
Anyway basic idea is a support unit that can spawn tiny attacking units that are good as fodder and can help your units heal after or during a battle, but not for long.
Would require a lot of micro to use effectivly but could probably be quite fun. Should also be able to figth decently but be way overpriced for an actual combat unit. Ranged upgrade provides some sort of semi-artillery unit (I don't actually know how usefull this would be).
Zerg Ravener (working title )
Size: Medium (Possibly armored)
HP: High - ~200
Movement: Medium air unit: Faster than capital ships but slower than ligth air units.
Damage: Medium, plasmic spores, air only.
Armor: High, 2?
Energy: 200 (Upgradeble to 250), starts with 50.
Built from: Greater spire, mutalisk upgrade.
Innate abilities: None.
Termite spores (Upgradeble ability): Activated ability (15 energy), Ravener does + ~7 damage with each attack at the cost of 10 energy.
Metabolic boost (Upgradeble ability): Activated ability (25) energy, 1 energy/second. Gains a significant speed upgrade.
Role: Replaces devour. In a non-upgraded role it's a heavy figther but it's not fast enough to catch smaller air units or strong enough to kill heavy air units. With upgrades you can either choose to have abilites to catch (or at least keep up with) ligth air units and destroy those, or gain enough damage to potentially deal with larger capital ships. However you can only do this as long as you have energy.
Or you could activate both abilities but only for a brief period of time.
Zerg Scythe
Size: Large
HP: High (~150?)
Movement: Air unit, slower than most air units but faster than capital ships.
Damage: Medium, ground only, long range.
Armor: Medium, 1.
Built from: Greater spire, mutalisk upgrade.
Abiliities:
Detonate: Based on the scourges volatile nature the Scythe can commit suacide and detonates immediatly in a fairly large explosion that does ligth damage (~25-50, + a lot of damage against armored targets,balance concerns) to all nearby air units AND sends all flying units flying away from the blast, distance and speed depending on their size.
Role: Basically the good old guardina with a twist. You can leave one of these guys behind as you run away and detonate him as the enemy figthers close in, doing some damage and sending them spinning out of controll. Or you could take the entire group and detonate them inside a carrier formation if you can get there and do very heavy damage.
Would of course mean that you have to remove the scourge. 
|
c) video replay, *.vrp, a video file being recorded by SCII during the game. The difference from conventional VODs is that it does not necessary record messages, stops recording under pause etc. Largest size, but watchabale without SCII engine.
That sounds good to me, its like built in fraps, but better
3) Peer-to-peer connection system INSIDE battle.net.
its already peer to peer, thats why you can get the message "Connection to battle.net has been lost" during your games (and you're still in the game), and thats why when the host drops (sometimes) the game crashes (if SC can't find another suitable host).
|
On November 12 2007 20:15 lololol wrote:And wtf is with that take it easy? Did I hit you or something I'm perfectly calm and if you have a different impression, it's most certainly wrong(as obvious english is not my native language).
My bad, but there had been so much flamewar over this section that I didn't want it to turn in that kind of shit. Anyway when seeing your smiley I smiled and I am confident now that caps lock and your strong affirmative sentence are not because you are angry or anything. (I wish I knew a word fitting better than angry there)
Anyway I defend this because I don't like PL's 2v2 right now and I had great time with AoE2 TC teamplay which does include a market as I said. You may not agree with this, you may not caring about TC which is a completely different game. But I hope that top players 2v2 will be funnier in sc2 than in bw.
Compare rushes in starcraft with rushes in wc3/aoe and you'll get the point.
Actually there are pretty nasty first/second age rushes in TC. Sure you can't end the game in 5 minutes but it is because the pace of it is someway slower all along the game.
Anyway we can't discuss this for ever with the current knoweledge of the game and especially when you consider the role of zergs in 2v2.
I fully support Bluzzman ideas but still concerning the observer thing why only for ladder games?
And it appears that most of us doesn't want to be helped much by the game, I hope that blizzard will take this into account as much as they can. But I am a little bit scares because the will probably want to introduce some unit management functions because:
1. All those players that think that war3 is TEH PWNAGE rts.
2. New players willing the game to be easy.
3. Magazines and internet criticism which will probably considering doing urself everything as something retarded.
I hope that if they go for MBS/autocast/anything supposed to makes your life easy there will be two type of games one including those functions and the other one which doesn't.
With all lader games being played the true :p way.
As an exemple I don't want the idle probe thing please. This is so much fun to see korean proplayers with idle probes/scvs/drones. :D
|
On November 10 2007 03:16 lololol wrote:
Having it as an upgrade is a horrible idea, it's like having MBS with an upgrade or some other game/UI mechanic.
It should have a percent tax and/or a time restriction and this will be enough to prevent abuses.
I wouldn't put any restrictions/upgrades on that. People in WC3 have created some really awesome strategies evolving solely/heavily on resource sharing, for example:
1. One guy doesn't build any combat units, just gathers resources and transfers them to ally who masses as many units early on as he can and/or techs quickly and then masses units.
2. One guy gives a certain amount of starting resources to the other one to boost his growth early on but that's it (won't work in SC2 most likely since you will start with just 50c and not 300g 150w like in WC3).
And I'd like to see such things in SC2 too, let the 2v2 become a real nice and more separate thing than 1v1 (in WC3 there are people who chose to specialise in 2v2s and usually pro-teams put them in their roster).
My idea and response to the unlimited unit selection (UUS from here on):
Since I've just recalled the gameplay in AoX (and I miss it so much that I've ordered myself a brand new copy yesterday because I lost my first) and how the huge army handling was solved there.
Basically you had all the standard hotkeys (1-0) and in addition F1-F4 I believe where you could put several already hotkeyed groups together (great thing in all-out assaults but rarely used). It's much better than just UUS imo, standard 12-24 unit hotkey groups provide you with decent control over your army while Fs are there just to ease you the pain of selecting all the groups and some more stuff manually to attack move once or twice during the game or just moving your whole battle group around.
Also unlimited building selection would be bullshit (yay for MBS and ResShare - no for UBS and UUS).
Another thing to rip from AoX:
Ability to edit your hotkeys in the game menu.
|
I don't know if this was already in at blizzcon but:
More Hotkeys. By pressing lets say TAB you can cycle between different sets of 1-0 hotkeys.
Example:
-1a2a3a4a5a6a for army
press TAB
-1t2t3t4t5t6t for buildings
press TAB
-check status of upgrades and research buildings
press TAB
-back to original army hotkeys
|
^
Scary.
In any case, the reaction to the latest Q&A gave me an idea:
TL is absolutely outraged at the high selection cap. A significant part of that is the fear that Zerg become overpowered. Hello? Doesn't that support the notion of racial bias in BW? If set sizes of control groups really do benefit the smaller army, why not have... dum dum duuuum...
Separate selection caps for the three races. Protoss can keep their 12, Terran can be changed to 18, Zerg - to 24. I think this ensures a completely neutral UI. This suggestion is made on the assumption that unlimited unit selection will be scrapped. Otherwise, there's no need for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
