|
Sweden33719 Posts
Theorycrafting ~New Ideas~: Units, UI, Gameplay
This thread is intended for discussion of your thoughts and ideas for Starcraft 2, collected in one place. You will still be allowed to create separate topics on these subjects, however the quality standards will be high and you should have a good reason for not posting it in here.
A good example of a quality thread would be Bluzman's excellent post on Territory-independent production. I will refrain from including an example of a bad post, but use common sense - put some effort into it and you'll be fine. Avoid well-worded (as well as not so well-worded) shit, make sure you have a point/idea and that you present it well.
What goes in this thread?
Well, anything from thoughts on the user interface (and how to improve it) to unit ideas. Keep in mind, however, that just because this is a very general thread it does not give you a license to post crap, stay on topic and contribute intelligently.
* Try to make sure that you are somewhat up to date on the development of the game, ie making posts about how much you hate the mothership being a one of a kind unit, when that is ancient history, is not a great idea.
* Don't post something that has already been posted, unless you have something new to add. This means read the thread before posting!
* Be civil. Giving constructive criticism on someone’s idea is great; however, calling him a "retarded noob" is not conducive to promoting a civilized discussion, I don’t think I have to explain why.
* As with all other parts of this forum, please - no polls!
Follow the rest of the SC2 forum guidelines and you'll be fine.
|
Here goes.. wouldn't it be great if you could move around the HUD, or parts of it? Like you could put the minimap on the top left, or have your minerals/gas counts near the middle of the screen for easy access, or even get rid of the button panel if you have all your hotkeys memorized. This would appeal to all those minimalists out there like me that want to see more of the battlefield.
|
Oh one more.. what does everyone think about a resource donating system? If any of you have played Age of Empires you'd know you could send some of your resources to your teammates if they needed some. I think this would be a GREAT addition to team play.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think a resource sharing system is already in place.
|
Well on the topic of resource sharing, do you think there should be a time limit when you can share resources (like 3 mins) so that you dont get any rediculous rushes due to one player funding another? Its not a problem in warcraft 3, but I could see it becoming a problem in starcraft 2.
|
On November 09 2007 13:38 Fen wrote:
Well on the topic of resource sharing, do you think there should be a time limit when you can share resources (like 3 mins) so that you dont get any rediculous rushes due to one player funding another? Its not a problem in warcraft 3, but I could see it becoming a problem in starcraft 2.
I think it works fine. If the 2 players decided to share resources early game, then it is up to them, but realize that the one player donating the money is at a big disadvantage because he is now behind in progression compared to the other players. All in all I think it would work great, it did in Age of Empires.
|
No, it would be broken if you could donate all of your cash to someone right away, because if you can eliminate one of the players then the sacrifice will be worth most of the time.
|
On November 09 2007 14:18 A3iL3r0n wrote:
No, it would be broken if you could donate all of your cash to someone right away, because if you can eliminate one of the players then the sacrifice will be worth most of the time.
Good point, but it doesn't have to be right away. Maybe a 1 minute delay or something.
|
Why would slinging in SC2 be suddenly way more powerful than in games like W3 or the AOE games? It's fun to do and allows for a lot of creative builds in both those games, but it isn't imbalanced in either - in almost all circumstances the slings are very easily countered.
On the subject of team games, I'd say its almost guaranteed they have shared unit control like in W3 - hopefully they will allow for full shared control too (building units and buildings for your ally) as there are sometimes frustrating moments that could be solved with this and I see no reason at all not to include it.
|
I think with issues like "noobifying" the game, there should be ways of "automating" micromanagement, but at the cost of doing it well. For example, reavers automatically shoot, but unless u micro them, they're just going to attack what is closest, so to play at a high level, you'll need to micro them even if they manage themselves.
Others:
1- make it so 2 scvs per mineral patch is the best. Once you micro so it's exactly 2 scvs mining for each mineral patch, the scvs stay mining their own minerals and don't move around. This is most efficient. (Just make it so if an scv approaches a mineral and it's already occupied, for the new scv to wait at their mineral patch for a while instead of moving to another one immediately) On the other hand, if you don't micro ur scvs so it's 2 per mineral patch, or if you put more than 2 per mineral patch, the scvs start wandering around and makes the mining inefficient.
2- mbs: make it so when you press the button, each building makes that unit unless you run out of minerals. Good for noobs. Bad for pros.
3- make shield regenerate like in halo. creates more room for micro.
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.
5- storm can be auto of course... but the AI should be as retarded as the reaver = attack first unit in sight... which is probably a unit that is surrounded by ur own units, or a mutalisk that is right over a clump of probes.
6- the damage/hp ratio needs to be high enough so units die. This is one of the big differences between starcraft and warcraft3. In starcraft, saving the "damage dealing" units is extremely dependent on positioning as they enter battle. Making units take too long to kill will negate this factor of the game.
7- I want to see micro players be able to compete with macro players to the point where they can keep up even if they are one base down. keep the little things in like vulture attack movement micro when attacking and running away from zealots, muta micro, scourge, etc, and make them more powerful. players need to be overwhelmed at any point in time by the things they need to do. each player's preference for what they like to do should be just as unique as their preferred build order. Boxer's marine micro is inscrutable, but why should marines be the only unit who's effectiveness increases by 500% when microed properly? Other units like reavers and templar and muta may increase by 200% or so, but still, all units should be designed so when they are microed, their effectiveness increases to 500%.
|
On November 09 2007 17:09 Gobol wrote:On the subject of team games, I'd say its almost guaranteed they have shared unit control like in W3 - hopefully they will allow for full shared control too (building units and buildings for your ally) as there are sometimes frustrating moments that could be solved with this and I see no reason at all not to include it.
I'd completely disagree with having shared unit control by default. They should just keep Team Melee as a game type in SC2.
Edit: If you realy think about it, what if you're in a public game and your random partner is messing up your shit. But then again I don't know how it works in W3, care to elaborate?
|
On November 09 2007 18:14 LoveandPeace wrote:1- make it so 2 scvs per mineral patch is the best. Once you micro so it's exactly 2 scvs mining for each mineral patch, the scvs stay mining their own minerals and don't move around. This is most efficient. (Just make it so if an scv approaches a mineral and it's already occupied, for the new scv to wait at their mineral patch for a while instead of moving to another one immediately) On the other hand, if you don't micro ur scvs so it's 2 per mineral patch, or if you put more than 2 per mineral patch, the scvs start wandering around and makes the mining inefficient.
Actually.. isn't it less efficient to have idle workers waiting in line rather than spending those few milliseconds looking for the next available/closest patch?
On November 09 2007 18:14 LoveandPeace wrote:2- mbs: make it so when you press the button, each building makes that unit unless you run out of minerals. Good for noobs. Bad for pros.
That was the original purpose of MBS afaik. I still don't like it though.
On November 09 2007 18:14 LoveandPeace wrote:3- make shield regenerate like in halo. creates more room for micro.
They did say in one of the Q&A batches that Protoss shield regeneration is at least two times faster.
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.
I like the idea, but it wouldn't work for SC at all.. I can't give a good reason, but I just don't think it'll work period. It just asks too much of the player to watch every unit at all times.
On November 09 2007 18:14 LoveandPeace wrote:5- storm can be auto of course... but the AI should be as retarded as the reaver = attack first unit in sight... which is probably a unit that is surrounded by ur own units, or a mutalisk that is right over a clump of probes.
I just don't want really smart AI that will basically play the game for you. Like the Zealot's charge ability, yeah its cool, but I'd rather see it user controllable to use the charge ability like a stimpack.
|
Well im sure this is like auto for the game but ive never seen it said in the forums is
:
Have adjustable Mouse speed not just scroll speeds on mouse and keyboard I think this is necessary when dealing with games with multiple screen resolutions.
I mean at 1280 by 1024 my screen size it's impracticable to use 800 dpi too much hand movement; so I have my mouse speed all the way up in OS settings.
I mean if they don’t do it people just buy those 348927389432798472 dpi mice.
|
And I really think the green circle around units when you select them doesn't look nice in 3d. I think instead, it should be like a green circle "shadow" that is filled in. green unfilled in circle is good for sprites but not for 3d. just looks bad.
|
On November 09 2007 17:09 Gobol wrote:
Why would slinging in SC2 be suddenly way more powerful than in games like W3 or the AOE games?
Compare rushes in starcraft with rushes in wc3/aoe and you'll get the point.
|
On November 09 2007 18:19 Spartan wrote:
Like the Zealot's charge ability, yeah its cool, but I'd rather see it user controllable to use the charge ability like a stimpack.
I agree fully with this. In starcraft, a frustrating thing is when one of your zealots gets attacked and they all go to attack their attacker, running themselves into even more fire. However if you pull em out as soon as they are shot, no probs. However with an automatic charge, baiting zealots is going to become a problem for Protoss players and I fear It might become an upgrade which ends up being detrimental rather than benificial. By giving the players control over the charge, it opens up more micro opportunities and prevents baiting. But then if you do that, youve basically just given zealots stim packs.
|
On November 09 2007 18:14 Spartan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2007 17:09 Gobol wrote:On the subject of team games, I'd say its almost guaranteed they have shared unit control like in W3 - hopefully they will allow for full shared control too (building units and buildings for your ally) as there are sometimes frustrating moments that could be solved with this and I see no reason at all not to include it. I'd completely disagree with having shared unit control by default. They should just keep Team Melee as a game type in SC2. Edit: If you realy think about it, what if you're in a public game and your random partner is messing up your shit. But then again I don't know how it works in W3, care to elaborate?
Of course you can enable/disable it from the allies menu at any point in the game you want, it's RIDICULOUS to even think there would be such an obvious flaw in the system in a BLIZZARD game. Gobol was reffering to restrictions like that you can't queue new units in an allie's buildngs, when the control is shared.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Well, I think I've had some stuff circulating in my mind for some time, maybe it's the moment to materialize the ideas.
1) Several methods of replay saving:
a) conventional *.rep that consists of commands issued by players - very small, but requires full engine to handle commands, is NOT open to analysis as it doesn't record gamestate.
b) extended replay, *.erp, still requires engine, but also records gamestate like how much minerals are owned by the players at every game tick and other stuff. Watchable in SCII, but is open to analysis in standalone applications. Medium size.
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.
2) Ladder observing mode:
- Anyone can join ladder games as an observer with a new AMM feature. This is, of course, only possible is both contenders set a flag "enable external observers" as "true". Any of the contenders may choose to boot the observer at any time if they find his lag and/or behavior unacceptable.
3) Peer-to-peer connection system INSIDE battle.net.
- If people live close to each other, they might want to have reduced latency especially if they are not playing a ranked game. Since p2p opens some possibilites for hacking, it might be impossible to set up p2p ladder games, but it would be welcome to enable them at least for non-ranked games.
4) A "split group" button. There's nothing more annoying than selecting 24 probes and shift-clicking to reduce group size to 12. Before someone starts whining about progaming and lewt skillz, this only happens once or twice during a game and is nothing but annoyance.
5) A worker-meter. That simple, monitors how many workers you have.
Should be it for now, I'm sure there are more but can't recall them.
|
On November 09 2007 12:50 Spartan wrote:
Oh one more.. what does everyone think about a resource donating system? If any of you have played Age of Empires you'd know you could send some of your resources to your teammates if they needed some. I think this would be a GREAT addition to team play.
Well this is something interesting.
But if I recall well you have to get a market in AOE/TC to do this. There is a real need for such a thing either an upgrade or building. To avoid this being free and straight ready to use.
Moreover due to the heavily developed flying unit parts of SC2 you would have to limit this with a given amount authorized at a time with a cooldown or something to avoid air superiority to be influenced in an impossible to counter way. I am thinking of mutalisk because they are so powerful and fast while shooting both air and ground units.
Third I think warning the other team of the donation would be fair allowing them to know what's going on and to pull out some counter.
Then I'll go with my own idea:
In team plays it would be great if you could switch to an observer mode. Imagine you are screwed but you did great in defending yourself thus having no way to recover. You go in obs mode which means you can't interfere in the game anymore but you aren't kicked when you don't have buildings anymore and if your mate(s) do take the win you get it too.
|
I've 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 or friendly units. Once cast on the targets units they would become buffed (either increased attack, defense, speed, or a combination thereof) for a short duration of time (maybe 15 seconds or so). The downside is that when the effect ends, the units would have their health reduced or maybe even 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, because it could back fire (specially if their speed has been increased).
It might be a little imbalanced if used together with dark swarm, however.
|
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.
|
Resource sharing. Not really that complicated.
The main reason you want to resource share is to get your ally another nexus/ hatchery. Just limit it to 400 minerals during the first 10 mins of the game.
PS: I really don't see a problem with the unlimited selection cap. You still want to flank etc. So I dot mind it, and I thimnk most people here are OK with it now.
We are OUTRAGED about MBS.
|
There's the possibility of abuse if you have observers in ladder games... Vent-cheating and the like. I doubt they'll do that.
|
The problem of abuse by having observers in ladder games is easily fixed by having a delay. The observers see the game as it was 2-5 minutes ago, which makes vent cheating useless.
|
Man, I can't believe I didn't think about this during the Battle.net discussion last month...
Anyways, if the replay sizes remain ~a couple of MBs, why not have a server segment that automatically stores ladder game replays (or if there are space issues, only the top 10%), which can be downloaded and immediately viewed from within SC2?
Also, replay rewinding and rollback (to allow replays from previous versions to be viewed) would be really nice, but probably a total bitch to implement.
|
Well i have this idea, i dont know what ppl things about it, but for me it will help a lot the entire community and it will end the mess about the hotkeys and helps that u get from the new shortcuts, etc...
ok here it goes.
Blizzard is always trying to make games easier for ppl to play, bc they want the game experience to be more richer in other guys instead of just clicking and pressing buttons, so they everytime they create a game with a new GUI, they put new things, like rally points with lines in it, automining, autocasters, tab between buildings, u can add several buildings into one key(1-2-3-4) like in W3, or just use tab, etc...
A LOT of SC players(most of them hardcore sc gamers) believe that one of the things that makes SC unique and an excellent game, its bc its hard to master, u need to have a god micro like slayer, or being a macro biatch like nada was one time, or both being like bisu. Anyways we all love SC bc of the gameplay(Fast) and bc its hard to master, u can know when someone is good etc, bc he can do micro battles and also multitasking and building, or making units...
And the problem starts there, the game becomes easier, so ppl wont be need to do that much a macro, but micro instead, but i personally believe in that SC right now its almost as perfect.
So my idea to resolve this is having 2 ways of playing SC2, it will be like Easy or Professional level, maybe somewhere in the config of SC, settings, bnet, w/e, u can change this, by easy i will mean all the features that blizzard want to add it, and professional to feel what its like to play it like a classic mode(SC right now), or maybe when u create the map u can say just allow ppl that plays Professional here, or mix, or just Easy, something like that, will make ppl play what ever they want, and also can help mantain the status of Pros being REALLY PROS, bc then Big tournaments like Starleague, WCG, ICCup, WGTour, or whatever tournament u want, u can add a rule saying: All players must compete in Professional Mode.
So thats basically is my idea, what u guys think? 2 modes of playing, and players can choose, what to play, but the tournament can also adjust so the game is played in anyway they want.
my 2 cents
|
On November 16 2007 05:10 sgt_cr wrote:
Well i have this idea, i dont know what ppl things about it, but for me it will help a lot the entire community and it will end the mess about the hotkeys and helps that u get from the new shortcuts, etc...
ok here it goes.
Blizzard is always trying to make games easier for ppl to play, bc they want the game experience to be more richer in other guys instead of just clicking and pressing buttons, so they everytime they create a game with a new GUI, they put new things, like rally points with lines in it, automining, autocasters, tab between buildings, u can add several buildings into one key(1-2-3-4) like in W3, or just use tab, etc...
A LOT of SC players(most of them hardcore sc gamers) believe that one of the things that makes SC unique and an excellent game, its bc its hard to master, u need to have a god micro like slayer, or being a macro biatch like nada was one time, or both being like bisu. Anyways we all love SC bc of the gameplay(Fast) and bc its hard to master, u can know when someone is good etc, bc he can do micro battles and also multitasking and building, or making units...
And the problem starts there, the game becomes easier, so ppl wont be need to do that much a macro, but micro instead, but i personally believe in that SC right now its almost as perfect.
So my idea to resolve this is having 2 ways of playing SC2, it will be like Easy or Professional level, maybe somewhere in the config of SC, settings, bnet, w/e, u can change this, by easy i will mean all the features that blizzard want to add it, and professional to feel what its like to play it like a classic mode(SC right now), or maybe when u create the map u can say just allow ppl that plays Professional here, or mix, or just Easy, something like that, will make ppl play what ever they want, and also can help mantain the status of Pros being REALLY PROS, bc then Big tournaments like Starleague, WCG, ICCup, WGTour, or whatever tournament u want, u can add a rule saying: All players must compete in Professional Mode.
So thats basically is my idea, what u guys think? 2 modes of playing, and players can choose, what to play, but the tournament can also adjust so the game is played in anyway they want.
my 2 cents
This isn't a HORRIBLE idea, but it has already been suggested multiple times, and I think most people agree that something like this would not be good. It would basically split the entire community into two groups, people who play on "old school" settings vs people who play on "new" settings. Plus it wouldn't be really fair if someone who chose to play with MBS could never become a pro or be respected no matter how good he was. We all need to be playing the same game, a big appeal of SC is that we are playing the same exact game as the pros.
|
On November 16 2007 08:58 stk01001 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2007 05:10 sgt_cr wrote:
Well i have this idea, i dont know what ppl things about it, but for me it will help a lot the entire community and it will end the mess about the hotkeys and helps that u get from the new shortcuts, etc...
ok here it goes.
Blizzard is always trying to make games easier for ppl to play, bc they want the game experience to be more richer in other guys instead of just clicking and pressing buttons, so they everytime they create a game with a new GUI, they put new things, like rally points with lines in it, automining, autocasters, tab between buildings, u can add several buildings into one key(1-2-3-4) like in W3, or just use tab, etc...
A LOT of SC players(most of them hardcore sc gamers) believe that one of the things that makes SC unique and an excellent game, its bc its hard to master, u need to have a god micro like slayer, or being a macro biatch like nada was one time, or both being like bisu. Anyways we all love SC bc of the gameplay(Fast) and bc its hard to master, u can know when someone is good etc, bc he can do micro battles and also multitasking and building, or making units...
And the problem starts there, the game becomes easier, so ppl wont be need to do that much a macro, but micro instead, but i personally believe in that SC right now its almost as perfect.
So my idea to resolve this is having 2 ways of playing SC2, it will be like Easy or Professional level, maybe somewhere in the config of SC, settings, bnet, w/e, u can change this, by easy i will mean all the features that blizzard want to add it, and professional to feel what its like to play it like a classic mode(SC right now), or maybe when u create the map u can say just allow ppl that plays Professional here, or mix, or just Easy, something like that, will make ppl play what ever they want, and also can help mantain the status of Pros being REALLY PROS, bc then Big tournaments like Starleague, WCG, ICCup, WGTour, or whatever tournament u want, u can add a rule saying: All players must compete in Professional Mode.
So thats basically is my idea, what u guys think? 2 modes of playing, and players can choose, what to play, but the tournament can also adjust so the game is played in anyway they want.
my 2 cents This isn't a HORRIBLE idea, but it has already been suggested multiple times, and I think most people agree that something like this would not be good. It would basically split the entire community into two groups, people who play on "old school" settings vs people who play on "new" settings. Plus it wouldn't be really fair if someone who chose to play with MBS could never become a pro or be respected no matter how good he was. We all need to be playing the same game, a big appeal of SC is that we are playing the same exact game as the pros.
Yep that idea hasbeen discussed many times over. I still dont understand why we dont like it though. If SBS is implemented, I can garrentee that ppl will use the editor to allow for MBS. People will do what they want to do. Give them options and allow them to take the game in the path that they want.
|
On November 16 2007 02:14 1esu wrote:
Man, I can't believe I didn't think about this during the Battle.net discussion last month...
Anyways, if the replay sizes remain ~a couple of MBs, why not have a server segment that automatically stores ladder game replays (or if there are space issues, only the top 10%), which can be downloaded and immediately viewed from within SC2?
Also, replay rewinding and rollback (to allow replays from previous versions to be viewed) would be really nice, but probably a total bitch to implement.
Blizzard actually saves a lot (possibly all, or based on level) of war3 ladder replays... When they changed the AMM system, people complained that they were being matched up with low skill players... Blizzard got like 20 random replays from top players from their server that were ladder matches and showed them that even though they were playing level 10's or whatever, the games were actually close.
You can also download some of the automated tournament replays, not all but some.. (not sure why only some)
|
New Terran add-on suggestion:
H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech
Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility.
Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player.
Abilities:
Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second.
[Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.]
Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3.
[Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.]
DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one.
[Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.]
Notes:
HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense.
Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal.
Gas cost is for DefSats flying.
Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of.
Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia.
|
Zeratul deserves Blink.
Also, I think B.net should have a "home channel"
Like I never play in BW-USA###.
Everyone knows my home channel is Op Tl-West.
Others is NL or Marlboro.. ya dig?
Too bad I'm retarded and suggested it too late.
Retardosaur.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On November 19 2007 03:18 SuperJongMan wrote:
Too bad I'm retarded and suggested it too late.
Retardosaur.
a critter that blocks chokes and stands where your cc should go
ON PURPOSE
|
Revenge of the Ragnasaur? (HAHA THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR CLICKING ME YOU BASTARDS!)
On a serious note though, i second the early suggestion for a modifiable/moveable UI. It's a small thing to ask for, and would make such a difference.
|
On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia.
Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it.
In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow.
|
On November 19 2007 14:12 Aphelion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia. Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it. In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow.
I see. Personally, I agree it's a little convoluted, but the end result sits rather well with me: this way, a successful drop won't send the entire Terran ball scrambling back into the base and a tiny squad of lings that slipped into your main won't force an entire safari on your part.
Would you be more enthusiastic about simplifying the thing to just release the same flying turret upon completion and rebuild it upon destruction, or do you find the concept fundamentally flawed?
|
Introduce a console to the engine, allowing a player to customise hotkeys and do other stuff. consoles make a game feel old school. -- i doubt this will ever happen though
And yeah i agree with the encoding of different hotkeys, like tab+letter or shift + letter means you can bind hotkeys to pretty much anywhere in the keyboard.
ability for protoss units to stop shield regen or 'use' their shield regen to get psi 1.5 times as fast or something, (akin to a deflier using consume???) and perhaps likewise for terran having scv's 'insert mana' by having an scv 'repaing' + adding minerals and gas into it to make psi regen faster.
|
quote:
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).end quote.
this idea is so stupid, all it is is improving on the current selection system, instead of outright changing it, as blizzard plans to do. and now with Q&A number 21, we learn that it's not unlimited anymore, it has a limit, i forget how much but i think they said it's going to be around 100? anyway, the point behind doing this is that hotkeys for units as zerg are totally impractical. if you have only hydralisks you don't want to have 12 and 12 adn 12 and 12...12 hydralisks isn't all that much after you have built like some of these pros do. you're going to want 150 hydralisks to move easily. 3 or 5 groups would use 5 or 3 hotkeys, freeing up all those other hotkeys. alternatively, you could assign all of them to 1 or 2 hotkeys for maximum unit selection and then you would manually reorder units from there. the point is...you should be able to order your entire force in just a moment, and not have it take all game to do it. your idea just puts us back to the beginning, where zerg players like me rarely use hotkeys because they're just not that useful.
about the resource trading thing...the only way i can see you could implement a different kind of trading system other than what they have in wc3...is to just do it different altogether. instead of doing it like a sloppy amateur as you guys have been shown, it's wrong to make such a thing an upgrade in a starcraft game...
i'm not sure if this idea is even practical for trading resources, but it shouldn't make the game unfair for the people that aren't trading:
a way to handle it is to make it so a worker has to pick up resources from a command center or nexus etc and then he can take it to an allied command center or nexus. the total resource count might be different from the norm, then again maybe it would be about the same, or maybe you could choose it.
this would be interesting because they could also if they wanted to make the resources salvagable so if the unit dies and if the resources are interceptedby the opponent then you would hurt for not securing the trade route. this would be a gameplay mechanic obviously and not an upgrade, which would be ok, it wouldn't allow instant resource trading so in exhange for taking them to your opponent neither of you have the resources for a time...although for shared bases it would be a much more viable option than having 2 allies on totally different ends of the map. and that would be realistic, and interesting.
another option that could be implemented either at the same time or just include it instead is to allow workers to return resources to an allied command center or nexus etc, but those resources would go to that ally instead of yourself. this would help if you have a really newb ally who doesn't know how to build extra workers you could help him get more resources just by maynarding them to his mineral patches and stuff.
anyway, returning to the selecting lots of units discussion, overall, i think that such a thing would improve your tactical mobility, being able to send x number of units to where you want to, and then x number over there, and it doesn't matter if you hotkey them or not if you keep track of them. and basically it would allow for even newb players to realize that there isn't a set number of units you need to attack or defend a position. i know some newb players think, ok, i need to get 12 of this unit, and 12 of that unit, then i will have a good attack party. isn't that their reasoning? but good players know that sometimes just whatever units you have lying around can be enough. and a newb player will understand that concept a lot faster with this new selection capability. not only that, but it will allow huge battles to actually be far more realistic, to be able to order a command and have just a bit of latency and every unit you gave the command to follows it. that's how it's supposed to be. when you have a high tech communications system, you want to be able to say, commander to all units, move toward the enemy's position. you don't say, commander to unit group 1, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 2, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 3, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 4, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 5, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 6, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 7, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 8, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 9, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 10, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 11, move toward the enemy's position, commander to unit group 12, move toward the enemy's position. ok, unassigned random group of units that are sitting over here, ditto. second unassigned random group of units that are sitting over here, ditto., third unassigned group? didn't you get the memo? move you sorry bastards!! move!!!!
now do you see how incredibly annoying it is? and in starcraft you couldn't even hotkey everything. you couldn't be in control of all, you just couldn't assign enough hotkeys to everything because you could only assign 1 or 12 at a time. all in all, the huge unit selection cap will make the game more fair, and more realistic.
|
How about when you cast an AoE spell on a building, instead of centering it on the building, it centers it on the cursor. Many times i've tried to Dweb a group of buildings but i misclick on one of them and instead of disabling all of them i only get one
but then again WC3 is like this, so i'm pretty sure SC will be like this too.
On a similar note attack moving into fog when theres a building there, i would rather the units just attack move...instead of attacking the building.
|
On November 19 2007 22:13 Chodorkovskiy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2007 14:12 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia. Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it. In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow. I see. Personally, I agree it's a little convoluted, but the end result sits rather well with me: this way, a successful drop won't send the entire Terran ball scrambling back into the base and a tiny squad of lings that slipped into your main won't force an entire safari on your part. Would you be more enthusiastic about simplifying the thing to just release the same flying turret upon completion and rebuild it upon destruction, or do you find the concept fundamentally flawed?
You don't design huge ideas independently of the gameflow of the current build and taking into detailed account current unit / tech build times and interrelationships. So really, the only features we can really say is like depots submerging to ground, minor features which are easy to evaluate independently.
This lack of awareness of game context is really what separates bnet from TL.
|
Idea:
There should be a togglable "gg" option when fighting the computer. Basically, when the computer knows its losing it will quit.
I hope this is part of a larger improvement in the AI as well. I would like to see them put some real effort into the AI, and make it pretty challenging for most people. I don't think this would be too hard to accomplish. Possibly an open-source AI would be good if they aren't up to the task.
|
One thing that bothers me about the current AI is if you're attacking their base and you kill their first army, they'll send units 1 by 1 at you when they finish training instead of massing them up at home so you have a decent army to face
|
I was wondering what TL thinks about Carriers gaining the Tempests' anti-ground shield. This has been "discussed" vigorously on the Bnet forums for some time. Personally, I like the idea because it defines the Carrier with greater clarity and allows for more focused balancing of counters. Anyone willing to offer insight?
On November 21 2007 08:19 Aphelion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2007 22:13 Chodorkovskiy wrote:On November 19 2007 14:12 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia. Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it. In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow. I see. Personally, I agree it's a little convoluted, but the end result sits rather well with me: this way, a successful drop won't send the entire Terran ball scrambling back into the base and a tiny squad of lings that slipped into your main won't force an entire safari on your part. Would you be more enthusiastic about simplifying the thing to just release the same flying turret upon completion and rebuild it upon destruction, or do you find the concept fundamentally flawed? You don't design huge ideas independently of the gameflow of the current build and taking into detailed account current unit / tech build times and interrelationships. So really, the only features we can really say is like depots submerging to ground, minor features which are easy to evaluate independently. This lack of awareness of game context is really what separates bnet from TL.
On one hand, your point is very much valid. Indeed, introducing major changes into the current build without regard for game flow will disbalance it. On the other hand, if you never introduce major changes, you'll be stuck with the current build for all eternity...
What I am hoping to achieve with my suggestions is not to have a "Designed by Chodorkovskiy" unit in SCII. It's to give the developers an idea, something they can be inspired by, work with and put into the next build.
There's no such thing as a "bad" idea. Yes, Bnet forums are full of trolls, teenagers and n00bs. But if you compare the amount of concepts generated by that rotting corner of the Internet with that coming from the clean and shiny TL, you will not come out ahead.
Please don't take this as another one of my "hostile" posts (rawr!). I think people here have a great deal of creative potential, but are holding themselves back because they're scared of "ruining" SCII and getting negative feedback from the comunity.
|
On November 25 2007 01:55 Chodorkovskiy wrote:
I was wondering what TL thinks about Carriers gaining the Tempests' anti-ground shield. This has been "discussed" vigorously on the Bnet forums for some time. Personally, I like the idea because it defines the Carrier with greater clarity and allows for more focused balancing of counters. Anyone willing to offer insight?
I really dont like the anti-ground shield. It just doesnt seem logical for the protoss to build a shield which only protects from attacks from the ground. As for the gameplay changes, its not a bad idea. In the end I dont think its required though, carriers will be taken down by fighters due to the high dmg to cost ratio that airborne AA has, and their ability to transverse any terran will give them that advantage which made then strong against ground in starcraft 1. It seems like its a feature for the sake of adding a feature.
|
Each force co-controlled by multiple players?
I am expecting to see this new type of match in SC2 in which macro monsters and micro monsters can put their strengths together. It will also be a great fun for non-pro players, for example I can control some marines and my girlfriend can control some medics ...rushing into tons of lurkers.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
You mean team melee, a game mode that already exists in StarCraft?
|
On November 25 2007 09:28 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
You mean team melee, a game mode that already exists in StarCraft?
I mean 2+ players share a start and units. In team melee each player still has his own start. (sorry if I am wrong about team melee. I have never played in such mode. Maybe it is not too late to try it now). All I wish is to have the same 1v1 game played by 2+ ppl on each side.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
You're wrong, team melee works exactly how you described the feature you want.
team melee is a completely seperate game mode, its not just a melee where people decide to ally each other. how do you not know that?
|
On November 25 2007 11:28 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
You're wrong, team melee works exactly how you described the feature you want.
team melee is a completely seperate game mode, its not just a melee where people decide to ally each other. how do you not know that?
My apologies. I have never played that option. All my knowledge about team melee is from Blizzard's page (Melee - Standard starting forces and resources, alliances allowed; Team Melee - Same as Melee, but with Team play (shared units) enabled). I thought team melee = melee + shared units, each ppl has his own starting base.
|
Team melee still gives you 200 more supply for every player you have though, and more races, so it is kind of different from 2 people playing as one.
|
On November 25 2007 12:04 Antifate wrote:
Team melee still gives you 200 more supply for every player you have though, and more races, so it is kind of different from 2 people playing as one.
Well I guess '2 people playing as 1' may be good in proleague but there must be a reason it never appeared. 1v1 is much more popular than 2v2. Just imagine a standard 1v1 game with savior and july on the same side.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
There's no point to it. You can't see what's going on as an observer and the games would be of lower quality. It wouldn't be a magical combination of strong macro and micro like you think it would, players use their units for specific purposes and the amount of times those purposes don't sync in team melee is immense.
|
On November 25 2007 20:42 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
There's no point to it. You can't see what's going on as an observer and the games would be of lower quality. It wouldn't be a magical combination of strong macro and micro like you think it would, players use their units for specific purposes and the amount of times those purposes don't sync in team melee is immense.
That's why it called team-play? In this mode players have to adapt to each other deciding who, where, when and what control and in the end team with bigger experience, better cooperation and organization gets more chances to win - exactly like regular 2v2, but more sophisticated and higher demands from team. This mode has very good potential.
|
On November 25 2007 21:34 InRaged wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2007 20:42 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
There's no point to it. You can't see what's going on as an observer and the games would be of lower quality. It wouldn't be a magical combination of strong macro and micro like you think it would, players use their units for specific purposes and the amount of times those purposes don't sync in team melee is immense. That's why it called team-play? In this mode players have to adapt to each other deciding who, where, when and what control and in the end team with bigger experience, better cooperation and organization gets more chances to win - exactly like regular 2v2, but more sophisticated and higher demands from team. This mode has very good potential.
i agree, but team melee is so underrated and underplayed it doesn't even matter.
maybe it will become popular in starcraft 2, but i don't see how it can be popular in starcraft when 95 percent of the bnet population doesn't even know the game mode exists.
|
There might not even be a team melee mode in SC2 since in WC3 you can already allow team members to control each others units and buildings. Practically the same thing (there still some differences).
|
i'm just hoping they do find a way to implement it PROPERLY unlike what happened in wc3 or sc. starcraft's was fine except for the fact that no one ever played the mode. maybe having team melee tournaments would solve the problem.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On November 25 2007 21:34 InRaged wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2007 20:42 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
There's no point to it. You can't see what's going on as an observer and the games would be of lower quality. It wouldn't be a magical combination of strong macro and micro like you think it would, players use their units for specific purposes and the amount of times those purposes don't sync in team melee is immense. That's why it called team-play? In this mode players have to adapt to each other deciding who, where, when and what control and in the end team with bigger experience, better cooperation and organization gets more chances to win - exactly like regular 2v2, but more sophisticated and higher demands from team. This mode has very good potential.
It doesn't as a spectator sport. It looks exactly like a 1v1 with more mistakes.
|
I haven\'t been posting but here\'s my ideas for a bit.
First and foremost I would like to emphasize the importance of OPTIONS
A lot of you makes it sounds like if a feature is implemented it has to be mandatory. It is simply not the case. Features are optional, newbs pick some of the less powerful, but easier to manage options, while pros pick more powerful, but harder to master options. (Newbs attack move, Pros use dragoons to snipe spidermines, Boxer uses arrow keys)
That\'s how life works, remember the training wheels? Remember Diapers? There we go.
Now I will address some of the more specific topics that came up in this thread:
Allow teamates to controll your units
-Should it be there?
Definitely, give an option for it. If you agree to let someone controll your unit, select that option (if you play dota you\'ll know what I\'m talking about). But he has to persuade you to give him the controlls. It can be great in team games when one person is left in the game with a pylon he can still grab a group of mutalisks and harass with them while his teamate focuses more on macro.
-How should it be implemented?
I don\'t think it should be allowed if one player is ELIMINATED. He should only be able to observe his teamate if he is eliminated. So a player has to somehow perserve his existence in the game in order to control allied units.
-What are some of the possibilities?
Well I think it is great if some player prefers an early aggressive style such as 9 pool speed which leaves him hopelessly overrun late game but he can then controls his allies\' units to continue the battle.
It is also gives a new definition of eliminating a player because severely crippling one player won\'t be as damaging because suddenly the other teamates have boxer micro.
Sharing Resources
-Should it be there?
Yes. This goes hand in hand with sharing units. In team play it greately enchance some of the decision makings. \"Should I expand myself and let him control my excess tank? Or should I fund him a badly needed nexus so he can care for himself?\"
-How should it be implemented?
I think it can be done by giving a trade option at your CC/Nexus. Click trade icon, then 2 colums. First colum says \"Give X minerals\" Second colum says \"Give Y gas\"
Rows will be the player names which the resources are given. You can adjust the quantify of X and Y anytime you please.
-What are some of the restrictions?
There should NEVER be a fixed variable restriction such as \"No fund transfer for first 10 minutes\". Because starcraft is a game of great variety and by imposing a fixed variable on a game with a multitute of different situations is not desireable.
The restriction should be by percentage, X% transfer cost(penalty) sounds good to me.
-What are some of the implications?
Well it can be greate fun because you can fund your ally with excessive gas to rush mutalisks while you mass zealot for awesome zlot/muta combo or something goofy.
It also enchances the decision makings of the game. For instance: You can choose to let your zerg ally expand and not building any army while you get the money he makes and use your army to protect his expansions.
-Other stuffs:
1. Infested building that does not produce fancy infested units but just spawn larvaes and creeps
I would love the infest building idea that you get extra larvae spawns from it. It goes very well with Bluzman\'s territorial control idea because once you infest a building you gain a production facility which you can use to gain momentum from elimination of one of his expansion, for instance.
My elaboration on it (How to implement):
The infested building should have hitpoints that come in 2 parts. Kind of like protoss shield and armour.
The first part is the infestation hitpoint. When a building is being infested, it start out with a low infestation HP. As time goes on, the infestation continues to deepen, causing the infestation hitpoint to increase.
The second part is the building's original hitpoint. When the building is infested, it will be damaged and say have about 80% HP remaining. As the infestation goes on, the building's original HP will be consumed slowly, as it decreases to 0 (Fully infested).
When a building is fully infested, the queen may leave.
When a building is partially infested, the player can kill the infested HP(queen will die) and get the building back under control.
A building with 100% hp cannot be infested. However, we can set a X% which the building CAN be infested.
The building's original HP will thus be X%
And the starting infestation HP will thus be (100-X)% so once the infestation starts the total HP of the building remains same.
2. Tabs for more hotkeys (I want to elaborate because he kept it kinda brief)
What a fantastic idea! An exellent OPTION. By using the tab key you gain access to different types of hotkeys. Icon somewhere will indicate which set of hotkeys are you on.
You can be on the building keys, where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 will be gateways.
You hit tab to change into the unit hotkeys, where 1 2 3 4 can be goons, 4 5 can be sairs, ect
Then you can micro/macro like a champ.
|
On November 27 2007 05:51 evanthebouncy! wrote:
2. Tabs for more hotkeys (I want to elaborate because he kept it kinda brief)
What a fantastic idea! An exellent OPTION. By using the tab key you gain access to different types of hotkeys. Icon somewhere will indicate which set of hotkeys are you on.
You can be on the building keys, where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 will be gateways.
You hit tab to change into the unit hotkeys, where 1 2 3 4 can be goons, 4 5 can be sairs, ect
Then you can micro/macro like a champ.
i doubt they would do that, but if they did, then for the love of god i would hope that they would make it absolutely completely customizable. because, frankly, it would screw up hotkeys completely if it wasn't.
err, i'm not sure how they would do that, or whatever, if it even fits into your idea. but here's what i mean.
if you set that up, that means you have to press 3 buttons instead of 2, or 2 instead of 1. because you have to swap over. not everyone would want units and building on a different menu i guess is what i'm trying to say. but if they just made like what? 10 pages of 10 hotkeyed unitgroups/building groups, or whatever, that'd be fine, although way too many probably lol...but to put units on one page and buildings on another is just a really really bad idea, unless that's just customizable to be a result for one person.
|
On November 27 2007 15:28 dcttr66 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2007 05:51 evanthebouncy! wrote:
2. Tabs for more hotkeys (I want to elaborate because he kept it kinda brief)
What a fantastic idea! An exellent OPTION. By using the tab key you gain access to different types of hotkeys. Icon somewhere will indicate which set of hotkeys are you on.
You can be on the building keys, where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 will be gateways.
You hit tab to change into the unit hotkeys, where 1 2 3 4 can be goons, 4 5 can be sairs, ect
Then you can micro/macro like a champ. i doubt they would do that, but if they did, then for the love of god i would hope that they would make it absolutely completely customizable. because, frankly, it would screw up hotkeys completely if it wasn't. err, i'm not sure how they would do that, or whatever, if it even fits into your idea. but here's what i mean. if you set that up, that means you have to press 3 buttons instead of 2, or 2 instead of 1. because you have to swap over. not everyone would want units and building on a different menu i guess is what i'm trying to say. but if they just made like what? 10 pages of 10 hotkeyed unitgroups/building groups, or whatever, that'd be fine, although way too many probably lol...but to put units on one page and buildings on another is just a really really bad idea, unless that's just customizable to be a result for one person.
OPTIONS
God read my first sentence.
|
Idea for Terran veterancy:
Higher-ranking units do not deal bonus damage or have increased rate of fire. Instead, they get better AI. That is, "green" Marines will do a nice little line-dance if ordered to move out, but a seasoned platoon will group up like in the Thor's bio.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking this feature:
1. reduces micro.
2. is overpowered.
3. becomes unwieldable with multiple units of different "ranks".
4. comes from a n00b.
My response is
1. I have never seen Marines move in BW like they do in some of the SCII videos.
2. Ranking already comes to balance out something the other races have.
3. C&C way of gaining XP is horrible. All units taking part in a battle should gain ranks, but much slower.
4. Like it, hate it - it's an idea.
|
On November 30 2007 17:32 Chodorkovskiy wrote:
Idea for Terran veterancy:
Higher-ranking units do not deal bonus damage or have increased rate of fire. Instead, they get better AI. That is, "green" Marines will do a nice little line-dance if ordered to move out, but a seasoned platoon will group up like in the Thor's bio.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking this feature:
1. reduces micro.
2. is overpowered.
3. becomes unwieldable with multiple units of different "ranks".
4. comes from a n00b.
My response is
1. I have never seen Marines move in BW like they do in some of the SCII videos.
2. Ranking already comes to balance out something the other races have.
3. C&C way of gaining XP is horrible. All units taking part in a battle should gain ranks, but much slower.
4. Like it, hate it - it's an idea.
I must say I hate this idea very much, oh yes I do.
|
On December 01 2007 14:26 YinYang69 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2007 17:32 Chodorkovskiy wrote:
Idea for Terran veterancy:
Higher-ranking units do not deal bonus damage or have increased rate of fire. Instead, they get better AI. That is, "green" Marines will do a nice little line-dance if ordered to move out, but a seasoned platoon will group up like in the Thor's bio.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking this feature:
1. reduces micro.
2. is overpowered.
3. becomes unwieldable with multiple units of different "ranks".
4. comes from a n00b.
My response is
1. I have never seen Marines move in BW like they do in some of the SCII videos.
2. Ranking already comes to balance out something the other races have.
3. C&C way of gaining XP is horrible. All units taking part in a battle should gain ranks, but much slower.
4. Like it, hate it - it's an idea. I must say I hate this idea very much, oh yes I do.
Please  for not contributing to the forums in any way
I do not agree with this idea because players should be able to choose whether they want their troops to run in formation or not. The assumption made here is that formations are better than non-formations which wont always hold true. There are always going to be situations where each movement style are desirable. If the game changes pathing for units based on how many kills a unit has, then there is just going to be some mass problems trying to get your troops to do what you want them to do, which will just increase frustration.
A big point that starcraft nailed was that troops do what you tell them to do and are very predictable in their movements. This is necessary in sc2 if the game is going to be good.
|
Please I contribute plenty to the forum. The idea is obviously very ill thought out and there wasn't much needed to be said about it. Starcraft is a game that puts a heavy emphasis on individual unit control. Having higher rank marines do little line dances, or whatever reduces micro and adds in unnecessary balance issues and also can complicate gameplay and control. If you are going to have a ranking system in place for starcraft, just stick to the damn bread and butter, and give that hero marine a +1 attack or armor bonus.
|
On December 01 2007 15:29 YinYang69 wrote:
Please I contribute plenty to the forum. The idea is obviously very ill thought out and there wasn't much needed to be said about it. Starcraft is a game that puts a heavy emphasis on individual unit control. Having higher rank marines do little line dances, or whatever reduces micro and adds in unnecessary balance issues and also can complicate gameplay and control. If you are going to have a ranking system in place for starcraft, just stick to the damn bread and butter, and give that hero marine a +1 attack or armor bonus.
I think the reason this is bad maybe because it takes away the user's control over their units. I want my marines to move straight, just straight, don't do fancy dances please. However if it's implemented it might force the player to lose control of his own units, something many of us wouldn't like to do.
|
I will reitirate: Marines in BW never, ever moved like they do in the Thor bio. They just don't do that, so saying it "takes away micro" is meaningless, because there is no such micro.
The point about total control is legitimate and I agree with it. Additional movement... what's that word other than formations?... ah yes, formations, can be optional. I can imagine plenty of scenarios, where a player may want their Marines all in one ball.
think the reason this is bad maybe because it takes away the user's control over their units. I want my marines to move straight, just straight, don't do fancy dances please.
...
Having higher rank marines do little line dances, or whatever reduces micro and adds in unnecessary balance issues and also can complicate gameplay and control.
+ Show Spoiler [what I mean by a line-dance] +
As you can see, units in BW already do it flawlessly.
|
The line dance that you refer to is the pathing system in starcraft doing what it should be doing. The fastest way from point a to point b is the shortest path. In starcraft, the pathing finds the shortest path and then tells the units to go on that path. If units moved in a group, individual units would actually be moving slower because to stay in formation, some units would have to travel longer distances.
Now in starcraft if you order groups of units that are close to each other to move, they will stay in the same order, which is really cool. Its due to the magic boxes and I hope they return in SC2. However if your moving groups of units that are not close together, they will be governed by individual pathing which will send them the shortest distance possible.
|
On November 30 2007 17:32 Chodorkovskiy wrote:
Idea for Terran veterancy:
Higher-ranking units do not deal bonus damage or have increased rate of fire. Instead, they get better AI. That is, "green" Marines will do a nice little line-dance if ordered to move out, but a seasoned platoon will group up like in the Thor's bio.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking this feature:
1. reduces micro.
2. is overpowered.
3. becomes unwieldable with multiple units of different "ranks".
4. comes from a n00b.
My response is
1. I have never seen Marines move in BW like they do in some of the SCII videos.
2. Ranking already comes to balance out something the other races have.
3. C&C way of gaining XP is horrible. All units taking part in a battle should gain ranks, but much slower.
4. Like it, hate it - it's an idea.
I might play SC2 if it has MBS. But I will NEVER even touch a game with a feature like that.
|
This is something that I have been thinking about since the beginning of SC1. Going along with the theme of bunkers and that horrible unit that replaced the vulture that can shoot while moving, i think it would be badass if there was an upgrade for the dropship that allowed the units inside to shoot from it while moving i.e. a moving bunker... maybe not as strong, but that would be really amusing to have drive by shootings with dropships. I haven't really thought of balance issues, like the range of the shot or whether this could actually be balanced, but I think it would be feasible in for game design and fits into the mode of the terrans.
|
On November 25 2007 01:55 Chodorkovskiy wrote:I was wondering what TL thinks about Carriers gaining the Tempests' anti-ground shield. This has been "discussed" vigorously on the Bnet forums for some time. Personally, I like the idea because it defines the Carrier with greater clarity and allows for more focused balancing of counters. Anyone willing to offer insight? Show nested quote +On November 21 2007 08:19 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 22:13 Chodorkovskiy wrote:On November 19 2007 14:12 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia. Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it. In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow. I see. Personally, I agree it's a little convoluted, but the end result sits rather well with me: this way, a successful drop won't send the entire Terran ball scrambling back into the base and a tiny squad of lings that slipped into your main won't force an entire safari on your part. Would you be more enthusiastic about simplifying the thing to just release the same flying turret upon completion and rebuild it upon destruction, or do you find the concept fundamentally flawed? You don't design huge ideas independently of the gameflow of the current build and taking into detailed account current unit / tech build times and interrelationships. So really, the only features we can really say is like depots submerging to ground, minor features which are easy to evaluate independently. This lack of awareness of game context is really what separates bnet from TL. On one hand, your point is very much valid. Indeed, introducing major changes into the current build without regard for game flow will disbalance it. On the other hand, if you never introduce major changes, you'll be stuck with the current build for all eternity... What I am hoping to achieve with my suggestions is not to have a "Designed by Chodorkovskiy" unit in SCII. It's to give the developers an idea, something they can be inspired by, work with and put into the next build. There's no such thing as a "bad" idea. Yes, Bnet forums are full of trolls, teenagers and n00bs. But if you compare the amount of concepts generated by that rotting corner of the Internet with that coming from the clean and shiny TL, you will not come out ahead. Please don't take this as another one of my "hostile" posts (rawr!). I think people here have a great deal of creative potential, but are holding themselves back because they're scared of "ruining" SCII and getting negative feedback from the comunity.
I'm torn. On the one hand, I liked a more anti-tank unit that required a counter bsides goliaths. Since G to A attacks seem weak so far... I'm not sure if having strong shields vs ground would be good. I dont like really strong air units for many reasons.
BUT, making the unit more counterable is a good thing in most cases. Air is always one of those areas that I just think maneuverability should be the biggest bonus... so I dunno. I will say that I was one of the ones who prompted blizzard to make goliaths better b/c carriers just seemed a little too good on certain maps back in the day... which goes along with my air shouldn't equal ultimate unit. But my biggest grief for that scenario is that Protoss don't have a good non-macro counter to Terran ground in most situations... and that bothers me a lot.
In conclusion, if terran ground still beats the hell outta P ground unless P has outmacroed... then the shields (aka carriers not easily countered by ground) would probably be fine... forcing T to tech or outmacro or die. But, I'd much rather see some countering going on in the ground to ground wars first.
|
I hope they give the tempest shield to the Carrier so that the carrier has a more specialized role. This would also require you to produce back up units like the Phoenix to protect the carriers from Vikings.
|
So, Jonanananana Walshaalshalsha.
I don't read this thread -_-;; or Steve, or whoever moderates this hell hole.
I was on B.net today surfing games, when a friend of mine came into channel, spammed my name, then logged off thinking I was afk.
I think another nice Bnet interface would be if you could see the chatroom screen as you were picking games to join etc. Ahh yes. Again, 2 months late or whatever, but always on time!!!
Also, the Retardasaurus critter idea is pretty gosu -_-;; It stands in CC and Chokes to mess you up. It's like the next pokemon evolution for Ragnasaur.
|
On November 25 2007 02:00 Fen wrote:
I really dont like the anti-ground shield. It just doesnt seem logical for the protoss to build a shield which only protects from attacks from the ground. As for the gameplay changes, its not a bad idea. In the end I dont think its required though, carriers will be taken down by fighters due to the high dmg to cost ratio that airborne AA has, and their ability to transverse any terran will give them that advantage which made then strong against ground in starcraft 1. It seems like its a feature for the sake of adding a feature.
i know what you mean, but i think you misunderstand the nature of the shield. i don't know that i get it either, but it seems to me it would have to do with range. it seems that carriers are NOT close to the ground, so they should be farther away from ground units that would attack them than the flying units that would attack them. the protoss units all have shields. the anti ground shield for carriers just emphasizes that they are far away from ground units? it is just an idea, i'm not making starcraft 2 so don't expect me to know for sure. anyway maybe ground units will still be able to attack carrier interceptors without the interceptors having anti ground shields. with my theory that would be about right.
On November 28 2007 13:45 evanthebouncy! wrote:
OPTIONS
God read my first sentence.
you should have specified you were referring to a game option rather than a design option.
|
On December 08 2007 04:39 Blacklizard wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2007 01:55 Chodorkovskiy wrote:I was wondering what TL thinks about Carriers gaining the Tempests' anti-ground shield. This has been "discussed" vigorously on the Bnet forums for some time. Personally, I like the idea because it defines the Carrier with greater clarity and allows for more focused balancing of counters. Anyone willing to offer insight? On November 21 2007 08:19 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 22:13 Chodorkovskiy wrote:On November 19 2007 14:12 Aphelion wrote:On November 19 2007 00:31 Chodorkovskiy wrote:New Terran add-on suggestion:H.E.A.T. - Hostile Environment Auxilary Tech Purpose: Reduce Terran dependability on psi for base defense (without flooding maps with an equivalent of Sunken Colonies), increase Terran trademark versatility and defensibility. Statistics: Requires Engineering Bay, costs 50/50, has 500 hp. Starts with 50 and can accumulate up to 200 energy. Energy only regenerates when HEAT is controlled by a player. Abilities: Cloak: Hides HEAT and the attached building from enemy sight. Negated by detectors. Requires 25 energy to activate, drains 1 energy per second. [Meant to reduce the vulnerability of hidden tech to enemy scouts, as well as increase building survivability in an attack.] Re-arm: Directly transfers energy from HEAT to target unit in a radius of 3. [Meant to prevent a plethora of energy on the home-front, as well as enhance viability of special abilities.] DefSat: Launches a controllable Defense Satellite, which is a flying, light-armored, mechanical unit with speed similar to lifted-off Barracks, 100 hp, 7 range and an area AG attack similar to that of pre-nerf Banshees. The Satellite can move anywhere within a distance of 5 from HEAT and crashes if the latter becomes neutral or is destroyed. Requires 100 energy to activate. Launching a new DefSat destroys the old one. [Meant as a semi-mobile base defense. In combination with Turrets and Planetary Fortresses, allows the Terran base a greater maximum degree of protection than that of other races, living up to the "defense" theme. Energy cost reduces the potential of offensive use for DefSats, control limit prevents massing DefSats at home for free.] Notes: HEAT may seem overpowered for tier 1.5 tech, but the main price Terran pays for it is not building a Reactor or TechLab: that is, the player sacrifices production for defense. Add-on gun idea was considered, but it would either be an anorexic add-on, or a Bunker on steroids. Also, it's too banal. Gas cost is for DefSats flying. Slow-moving pew-pew satellites are constructed by Professors in some Stone Age RTS I can't remember the name of. Ideas taken from: floating base defense thread by Diablo_M.D. on the Bnet forums, Cloaking Engine add-on idea from someone here, Military Base concept from Haegemonia. Haha these ideas clearly have bnet forums written all over it. In general, I believe that complicated ideas designed with clearly specific uses and set combos in mind tend to fail in RTS games. The strength of SC was how different basic things had many versatile uses, many of them completely unforeseen from the developers. This idea is nicely formatted, but I think it is far too bloated and doesn't take into account the its row in game flow. I see. Personally, I agree it's a little convoluted, but the end result sits rather well with me: this way, a successful drop won't send the entire Terran ball scrambling back into the base and a tiny squad of lings that slipped into your main won't force an entire safari on your part. Would you be more enthusiastic about simplifying the thing to just release the same flying turret upon completion and rebuild it upon destruction, or do you find the concept fundamentally flawed? You don't design huge ideas independently of the gameflow of the current build and taking into detailed account current unit / tech build times and interrelationships. So really, the only features we can really say is like depots submerging to ground, minor features which are easy to evaluate independently. This lack of awareness of game context is really what separates bnet from TL. On one hand, your point is very much valid. Indeed, introducing major changes into the current build without regard for game flow will disbalance it. On the other hand, if you never introduce major changes, you'll be stuck with the current build for all eternity... What I am hoping to achieve with my suggestions is not to have a "Designed by Chodorkovskiy" unit in SCII. It's to give the developers an idea, something they can be inspired by, work with and put into the next build. There's no such thing as a "bad" idea. Yes, Bnet forums are full of trolls, teenagers and n00bs. But if you compare the amount of concepts generated by that rotting corner of the Internet with that coming from the clean and shiny TL, you will not come out ahead. Please don't take this as another one of my "hostile" posts (rawr!). I think people here have a great deal of creative potential, but are holding themselves back because they're scared of "ruining" SCII and getting negative feedback from the comunity. I'm torn. On the one hand, I liked a more anti-tank unit that required a counter bsides goliaths. Since G to A attacks seem weak so far... I'm not sure if having strong shields vs ground would be good. I dont like really strong air units for many reasons. BUT, making the unit more counterable is a good thing in most cases. Air is always one of those areas that I just think maneuverability should be the biggest bonus... so I dunno. I will say that I was one of the ones who prompted blizzard to make goliaths better b/c carriers just seemed a little too good on certain maps back in the day... which goes along with my air shouldn't equal ultimate unit. But my biggest grief for that scenario is that Protoss don't have a good non-macro counter to Terran ground in most situations... and that bothers me a lot. In conclusion, if terran ground still beats the hell outta P ground unless P has outmacroed... then the shields (aka carriers not easily countered by ground) would probably be fine... forcing T to tech or outmacro or die. But, I'd much rather see some countering going on in the ground to ground wars first.
About the Carrier:
1. In some screenshots, Turrets are attacking it and not the Interceptors.
2. In the unit bio, it has a special "deploy Interceptors" animation.
This means Blizzard is taking a more straightforward approach to Carriers and could potentially mean the latter can no longer attack while moving. If this is indeed the case, all the more reason to buff them against ground.
|
Just because the carrier in SCII has a more specialized role against ground unit compared to the original game that doesn't mean it will be stronger against ground. It may just be weaker against air and exactly the same against ground. It may be weaker against air and only a little stronger against ground, etc.
That is a balance issue. Not an issue of carrier role.
If AI auto targets the carrier itself then that is terrible for micro.
|
I've already mentioned this idea somewhere, but im gonna add it to this thread because I think its decent:
A type of mineral patch with vespene traces that gives 8min + 1gas.
There would be a lot of interesting applications for this imo.
|
On December 09 2007 16:01 fight_or_flight wrote:
I've already mentioned this idea somewhere, but im gonna add it to this thread because I think its decent:
A type of mineral patch with vespene traces that gives 8min + 1gas.
There would be a lot of interesting applications for this imo.
Yeah, it would be really interesting having only 1 resource... somebody even had a fitting name for it - vesperium.
|
On December 09 2007 17:42 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2007 16:01 fight_or_flight wrote:
I've already mentioned this idea somewhere, but im gonna add it to this thread because I think its decent:
A type of mineral patch with vespene traces that gives 8min + 1gas.
There would be a lot of interesting applications for this imo. Yeah, it would be really interesting having only 1 resource... somebody even had a fitting name for it - vesperium.
I think he means in addition to the existing min patch/vespene gieser have a min patch with some vespene in it
It doesnt have to be the ONLY resource
|
So far Blizzard has announced a few ground units that can move over terrain previously impassable to ground units. The protoss have the colossus and the stalker, the terrans have the reapers (vikings too to some extent I suppose). What do you guys think the zerg will have?
We've glimpsed the nydus "worm" although there's no telling how that works exactly. And it's clear that Blizzard can't just repeat what they've done with the terrans (aka have a light infantry unit that jumps) or with the protoss (teleportation + a large mech unit that steps over the terrain). What I'm betting on, and what I think would be really cool, is if Blizzard replaced burrow with "tunnel", an ability whereby zerg units could tunnel underground for a certain short distance and use this ability to traverse cliffs. To balance this, I think you'd have to make it really really slow and only work over short distances. So zerg players wouldn't be able to just tunnel their entire army into your base. And of course it would only apply to small infantry-type units like those that could burrow in BW. Alternatively, you could just give the zerg a unit that specializes in tunneling.
|
On December 10 2007 12:50 talismania wrote:what I think would be really cool, is if Blizzard replaced burrow with "tunnel", an ability whereby zerg units could tunnel underground for a certain short distance and use this ability to traverse cliffs. To balance this, I think you'd have to make it really really slow and only work over short distances. So zerg players wouldn't be able to just tunnel their entire army into your base. And of course it would only apply to small infantry-type units like those that could burrow in BW. Alternatively, you could just give the zerg a unit that specializes in tunneling.
yeah if moles can do it, why not the zerg? there should be a mole-like creature for them to assimilate somewhere.
|
On December 10 2007 12:50 talismania wrote:
So far Blizzard has announced a few ground units that can move over terrain previously impassable to ground units. The protoss have the colossus and the stalker, the terrans have the reapers (vikings too to some extent I suppose). What do you guys think the zerg will have?
We've glimpsed the nydus "worm" although there's no telling how that works exactly. And it's clear that Blizzard can't just repeat what they've done with the terrans (aka have a light infantry unit that jumps) or with the protoss (teleportation + a large mech unit that steps over the terrain). What I'm betting on, and what I think would be really cool, is if Blizzard replaced burrow with "tunnel", an ability whereby zerg units could tunnel underground for a certain short distance and use this ability to traverse cliffs. To balance this, I think you'd have to make it really really slow and only work over short distances. So zerg players wouldn't be able to just tunnel their entire army into your base. And of course it would only apply to small infantry-type units like those that could burrow in BW. Alternatively, you could just give the zerg a unit that specializes in tunneling.
I want my damn zerglings with jetpacks!
On a more serious note; I'm presuming that zerg is going to have something like terran, e.g. jumping units. Maybe tunneling units, but only "maybe".
|
I want that jungle tileset doodad of a giant broken down robot to be in SC2, whats the story with that thing anyways
|
Concerning what was said earlier about team melee being a 1v1 with more mistakes, I was thinking about this addition to team melee control features. Now, I think it would take a while getting used to, but if you had a good partner to play with (or partners), this could be beneficial.
Suppose now that we have two players, one red, one green on same team. What if we had both players capable of seeing the other's cursor, and what it was doing. For example, if the red guy left clicked to start selecting a bunch of units, the green guy would see red cursor on the screen and the red rectangle as it was expanding, etc. All at the same time, the green guy would have his green cursor and be doing whatever he may be doing with that.
In addition, in the minimap display, where you currently only have your rectangle displaying where you are looking, we add the ally(s)'s rectangle as well, again color coded.
Now the reasoning behind this is that say while we may have a micro guy and a macro guy, having one person restricted to each task seems silly. The micro guy may need some help in a major battle, and the macro guy may not be particularly busy with macro at the moment and have extra apm to spare. Now if you can see your teammate's cursor, you won't accidentally start screwing around with the units he's controlling. Currently, SC1 displays a circle around units your ally selects, but you only see this after the fact, that is after they have been ordered. It seems that seeing the cursor of your ally would allow you two to just stay away from each other's controlled units, so that you can partition control of armies more effectively, without having to type stuff in if you are not lanning.
Seeing the rectangle's purpose is that say you notice a drop coming to an expo, which you must defend against. Now if your ally has already noticed this, and is focusing his attention there, you do not have to worry about it. Using SC1's current system though, you would have to click on that part of the map and see if your ally is controlling any units there at the moment, and the possiblity exists that he may not be actively clicking anything there but is prepared to defend, in which case you are wasting your time. Seeing his rectangle on the minimap however, would remove this issue as you know he is observing the area in question.
Those two changes seem like they could make team melee a much more viable system, as fixed teams with partners who play with each other often could coordinate their movements better this way, with less contradictory orders to units, and etc. For one thing they would have to control their mouse movements so that no confusion can arise over which units are actually about to be selected, but in the end, this extra information that you are given in your display should reduce the number and frequency of mistakes.
|
This was inspired by a programming program which allowed two people to simultaneously work on a program, with both mice displayed on the same screen. It was wonderful for productivity after you got used to it.
|
lol dats an interesting way of playing a 2v2. instead of having 2 bases vs 2 bases its 1 v 1 except controlled by 2 players on each side.
|
On December 19 2007 14:02 dybydx wrote:
lol dats an interesting way of playing a 2v2. instead of having 2 bases vs 2 bases its 1 v 1 except controlled by 2 players on each side.
Wow, guys, how many times does this have to be restated. There's alreadya game mode practically like this. Its called Team Melee, just click on the game modes tab and scroll down while on the game creating screen.
|
On December 19 2007 14:56 crazie-penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2007 14:02 dybydx wrote:
lol dats an interesting way of playing a 2v2. instead of having 2 bases vs 2 bases its 1 v 1 except controlled by 2 players on each side. Wow, guys, how many times does this have to be restated. There's alreadya game mode practically like this. Its called Team Melee, just click on the game modes tab and scroll down while on the game creating screen.
I know there is a mode called team Melee. But that's not what my post was about
|
I would like multiplayer maps to be linkable. Theres a trigger in SC that basically says "load this next map upon victory of the first map." But it only works for single player. Imagine the possibilities for a crazy UMS if you could load different maps. Like 4 players are playing one map and they get to a cave entrance on a world map. What most map makers did here was transport them to another part of the same map that looked like caverns. But imagine if instead of doing that, it displayed the victory condition, and then loaded the next map, which was the inside of the cave. Upon completion of that it can load back to the original map, or another map that looks the same but has progress saved or something
Of course you'd have to download all the maps or something beforehand, but come on its SC2
|
I'd like to see some options when building some of the units.
For example, in SC1 I thought it would be cool if you could pick what type of mines the vulture is deployed with.
You could choose spider mines - default
Flash bangs - blinds units in a 3x3 cell
EMP frags - blah blah
Once a vulture is built, you couldnt change the type of mines it carries. Only while its building, or before you start building at the factory.
Or say most spellcasters have 3 spells, but you can only pick 2 of them they know how to cast.
It could get interesting and vary strats and "combinations" a lot without introducing an assload of
units. Which gets confusing. And since i forsee some options not very viable in a particular MU's they could be tweaked at blizzard discretion to balance problem MUs without impact on other matchups.
|
On January 13 2008 10:12 Amnesty wrote:
I'd like to see some options when building some of the units.
For example, in SC1 I thought it would be cool if you could pick what type of mines the vulture is deployed with.
You could choose spider mines - default
Flash bangs - blinds units in a 3x3 cell
EMP frags - blah blah
Once a vulture is built, you couldnt change the type of mines it carries. Only while its building, or before you start building at the factory.
Or say most spellcasters have 3 spells, but you can only pick 2 of them they know how to cast.
It could get interesting and vary strats and "combinations" a lot without introducing an assload of
units. Which gets confusing. And since i forsee some options not very viable in a particular MU's they could be tweaked at blizzard discretion to balance problem MUs without impact on other matchups.
That's a sick idea.
|
When the units are grouped, I'd like to be able to tell which ones have sufficient energy to cast spells so I can use them quickly; maybe a small energy bar which changes colour when it gets to say, 75 or 100, so that I can select those really fast.
I'd also like the firebats to give damage to surrounding units when they explode when they die, like the dune 2 devastator.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
In Armies of Exigo (maybe in WC3 too, I can't remember), the units have a blue mana bar below their life bar I think, which makes it pretty easy to see if they have energy or not.
|
I mean when you have a group of them; you can easily see if they are damaged because their icons progressively go from green to red. something similar for energy would be useful.
|
The Immortal shields would be better off as an activatable ability that works against all types of damage, but needs time to recharge. This way it will be good at breaking pushes/defenses, but against an army that is mobile and can retreat or move around them, until the shield runs out, they'll be obviously weaker. This will also make it less of a "I have immortals and you have tanks so I win regardless of what you do with them".
|
On January 19 2008 01:29 lololol wrote:
The Immortal shields would be better off as an activatable ability that works against all types of damage, but needs time to recharge. This way it will be good at breaking pushes/defenses, but against an army that is mobile and can retreat or move around them, until the shield runs out, they'll be obviously weaker. This will also make it less of a "I have immortals and you have tanks so I win regardless of what you do with them".
I really like this idea. I hope blizzard takes notice because we need more abilities that have potential for tactical plays rather than the basic "this does damage, this kills this".
|
as im aware, toss can now move photon canons or buildings wherever they like or something like that
Terran could already lift buildings, but now they can burrow depots
i think zerg should have an upgrade option on their creep (possibly in lair/hatch level tech) whereby the creep can grow down/up hills. Meaning any unit can simply walk on the creep which would act as stairs/pathway to get to land that would require dropshipping etc.
So example on python if this upgrade occurred then a drone can walk down to the island expo and place hatch there or whatever.
Was always a small thought
and amnesty afaik vultures are out of sc2. and good riddance if i my add
|
On January 19 2008 11:36 liosama wrote:So example on python if this upgrade occurred then a drone can walk down to the island expo and place hatch there or whatever.
You can do that right now, its the 'float a drone' upgrade.
|
I just wonder how many ppl here do not like the current supply system (depot/overlord/pylon). For sc1 it is ok since the psi limit is only 200 and if the game goes that far the players will no longer need to spend time to build more supply in middle of a battle. In sc2 that could be a problem say much more units are allowed and u need to make a hell lot of supply. Well the depot/overlord/pylon make the game story rich, that is what I like in it. But I do not like to see a full screen of depots (even they can burrow). There is no alternative in my mind for now. Drop the depots? To produce more units one got to get more mineral and gas, hence more bases and worker units, that is already a supply system. Or maybe an upgrade one can make less supply supporting more units? I hate to switch screen to build supply while already busy with producing units in some intense fight.
btw another point a little bit off topic. Will sc2 come out with native no cd play as an option in installation? It is really a shame the recent patch asks to copy a 500+MB file to harddisk after 10 years.
|
Mind control thing
Background: IMO the ability to steal a worker and develop your enemy's race has much potential in it. It could bring much more strategy to the game if developed properly thus making sc2 both more entertaining and spectacular.
Idea: Give all races such an ability.
Example of how it can be realized:
Dark arhon with mind control ability for protoss, Nomad with "pick-up" abbility (flies over the worker, launches ability, picks the worker up, processes it for some time, releases a friendly unit. In other words works like an UFO stealing a human). Zerg's Queen infesting cc ability could be changed so that cc produces not infested terrans but friendly scv's or both (the cc maybe should remain it's ability to hold gathered minerals). Or zerg's overlord could work just the way nomad did.
Explanation:
I dont wont to discuss the ethical point of it (how it would look like and be explained in sc-world) coz the game process itself matters much more IMO. The question is whether developing an enemy's race is fun and can widen the borders of stragical play for starcraft or it's a burden and should be ignored completely.
A simple example of how it can be useful for a terran:
Terrans don't have those cool cannons that P's do. Stealing a worker just for the purpose of building cannons at expansions could be a good thing to do.
|
Another thing I thought about the Immortal Shields being an activatable ability working against all attacks, is instead of the ability having a cooldown, it would reduce the actual shield amount the immortals have over time.
This way it will look more natural compared to a cooldown, but...
It will require some countermeasure to prevent immortal's ability becoming useless if they got hit a few times by surpirse and lost a lot of shields and can't activate their ability, which could make them useless, because it will always force you to activate early, so you don't get screwed up, but then the enemy can just retreat or he wasn't planing to attack, e.t.c. it would be way too easy to abuse and make it useless.
I thought about 2 solutions to this:
The first one is to make the shields work only when the ability is activated, and while it is not, attacks will directly damage their hp.
The second is to make them have a lot of shields and lower hp, but this could make them too weak when the ability expires and leaves them with just their low hp ;P
|
On January 17 2008 16:54 FrozenArbiter wrote:
In Armies of Exigo (maybe in WC3 too, I can't remember), the units have a blue mana bar below their life bar I think, which makes it pretty easy to see if they have energy or not.
um.... its in WC3 too.
and even in SC and BW -_-
there is a purple bar below the life bar of every unit with mana.....
temp,vessel,DA,defiler....
open ur BW and check it^^
|
"lol dats an interesting way of playing a 2v2. instead of having 2 bases vs 2 bases its 1 v 1 except controlled by 2 players on each side."
"Wow, guys, how many times does this have to be restated. There's alreadya game mode practically like this. Its called Team Melee, just click on the game modes tab and scroll down while on the game creating screen."
"I know there is a mode called team Melee. But that's not what my post was about "
read my above post, 95 percent of bnet doesn't realize the mode exists.
On January 19 2008 14:32 duuuke wrote:btw another point a little bit off topic. Will sc2 come out with native no cd play as an option in installation? It is really a shame the recent patch asks to copy a 500+MB file to harddisk after 10 years.
heh, actually this is something that people made up already, a no cd thing for starcraft, and you had to copy that file to your hard drive. well, blizzard has finally decided to do this, and they did it better than those other guys did. yeehaw. so yeah, some people have been copying the file over. and anyway, they are not forcing you to copy the file over. it's just furthering the installation if you want to do it. like when you install programs usually there is like a full installation which requires more disk space but lets you use it without the disc. well that's what this new patch can let you do now. and now, it's official. i hope they do more of these things, like replay chart or whatever. if starcraft 2 came out with an optional thorough replay chart feature, that would be awesome.
about you guys picking on the immortal, hahaha...just trust blizzard knows what they're doing huh?
|
make the UI open source!!! ^____^. have the game scriptable like in starsiege tribes.
|
On January 19 2008 01:29 lololol wrote:
The Immortal shields would be better off as an activatable ability that works against all types of damage, but needs time to recharge. This way it will be good at breaking pushes/defenses, but against an army that is mobile and can retreat or move around them, until the shield runs out, they'll be obviously weaker. This will also make it less of a "I have immortals and you have tanks so I win regardless of what you do with them".
IMO activable +only high damage negation would be the best combination..
|
On January 20 2008 08:53 freelander wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2008 01:29 lololol wrote:
The Immortal shields would be better off as an activatable ability that works against all types of damage, but needs time to recharge. This way it will be good at breaking pushes/defenses, but against an army that is mobile and can retreat or move around them, until the shield runs out, they'll be obviously weaker. This will also make it less of a "I have immortals and you have tanks so I win regardless of what you do with them". IMO activable +only high damage negation would be the best combination..
This way it can become way too situational to use.
It's kind of easily "countered", if the enemy just targets other units, so you're forced to commit to mainly immortals as a ground force and if they are also countered by low damage units at the same time, this will make them pretty much useless.
|
I don't see what is wrong with passive traits differentiating units from each others, putting them in different unit roles.
For strategy and game play, Immortal passive shields are way better than Immortal active ability shields.
Not every unit should have an active ability. And those active abilities that are in the game better be quite important/potent.
|
Reducing tank damage TEN times is nothing else but potent!
|
|
|
Here's a new idea for the Zerg, since they need a chance against the Protoss and Terrans.
If the Zerg can get 10 or more Banelings near an enemy base, he can use up the Banelings to create a huge, slow moving Omega Baneling. This walking bomb will set into the ground where it will detonate after gathering enough energy to vaporize anything within range.
The evolution into a Omega Baneling takes time, and so the evolving creature can be easily destroyed before it can form. The Omega can only form when enemies are a certain distance away, and the player can only have one Omega at a time (to prevent evil spamming)
|
Here's a good idea for a cheat: if you type in the code THEREGOESTHEVILLAGESAGAIN, you summon the Pissed Off Super Protoss Preserver: Whenever you select it, it says "You trying to MAKE me angry?" It looks like an Archon, without the orb around it. It fires millions of the Yamato Cannon bursts when attacking, sending them in all directions, which can kill your units as well.
Another cheat: THEMINDCONTROLLERCRACKED
Causes all Zealots, Zerglings, and Marines to go rogue, attacking everything, including themselves. Use this when you have none of these units near your base, and watch the carnage.
|
Terran Cheat: THECAVALRYISLOOSE
In a campaign, All Barracks will immediately begin producing a dangerous weapon: GPS guided babies. The babies have barely any health, but they cost so little and can be constructed so quickly that they can overwhelm an enemy base. They automatically go towards the nearest enemy, even if that enemy is very far away. If the mission you are playing in does not have Barracks to be built, then the babies begin appearing around all of your units and will act they normally will: swarm and destroy.
Terran Unit: Absorber Ghosts
These Ghosts have managed to absorb the powers of the Protoss High Templar. Overcharged with energy, they have been surgically modified so many times that they look like a Protoss in a Ghost suit. They cost as much as the Mothership does, but the Absorber can actually stand a chance against that ship: It's energies cause all units except for Heroes, High Templar, robot units, and Overlords to immediately aid the Ghost until it dies. This ability requires most of it's energy. It can also turn single units permanently onto their side, or it can Absorb them- hence it's name. This adds the health and shields of the Absorbed unit onto the Ghost, killing the Absorbed unit, but causing the Ghost to need to take a few moments to contain the new energy. While distracted, they are unable to fight back against any attacks, and cannot use any other power except for Absorb for thirty seconds.
Tell me what you think.
|
>_>
<_<
Okay, moving on.
I've heard that Blizzard is dramatically weakening Pylons, so it actually makes sense to target them instead of just destroying the buildings they power. As the Overlord is already a weak link for the Zerg in some situations (Corsair-based PvZ, Scourging Overlords when you're behind in a ZvZ, Wraith into expand TvZ, etc.), it doesn't make sense for the Supply Depot to undergo a similar nerfing.
Instead, Terrans should face slightly more economical problems: decreasing returns and logistics. Whereas Protoss Psi and Zerg Control are fairly fluid and metaphysical, Terran Supply is actual material that needs to be distributed and accessed.
In terms of diminishing returns, Supply should increase in cost/unit as the game progresses. This is simply because as the amount increases, the infrastructure necessary to distribute it follows, necessitating higher operating costs. Furthermore, logistics should play a role. Clumping Overlords or Pylons still makes sense, but concentrating an entire army's supplies in a single area simply makes no sense. Thus, in accordance with the infrastructure and operating costs I mentioned above, units, upgrades, and research should be more expensive the further away they are from a Depot.
As I see it, this would allow Blizzard to balance both the early game (proxies) and late game (macro fest) in a way that both makes sense and can be fine-tuned as necessary. While maintaining the actual HP of a Depot, losing your supply line as a Terran would hurt just as much as a Protoss with an unpowered base or a Zerg unable to detect or reinforce.
|
losing your supply depots DOES hurt a terran, thats why terrans space out their depots now
as for your idea it sounds complicated, and doesn't really make sense. One supply depot supplies 8 units (or however many it is). So when you have 150 units, why would a supply depot suddenly supply 7 units? or why would it cost more to supply the same 8 units?
If a grocery store had enough food to feed 100 people, and then you built another grocery store with the same amount of food. Would you assume that the second grocery store would cost more to maintain, or that the second grocery store could only feed 95 people?
Considering a game of SC is only 20+ minutes, no soldier is going to starve in that amount of time. Assume that there is no infrastructure for distributing supplies and the soldiers pick it up at the depot...AFTER the battle (when the game ends)
winner.
|
Of course, but I'm not referring to Supply as in victuals (well, then we wouldn't need Depots at all), but as to the components for mechanical units and the ammunition/equipment for infantry. It makes sense to mass-produce your base material and warehouse it, only retrieving some when necessary to make finished product. The cost of production in the actual Barracks/Factory/Starport just goes towards assembly and training of personnel.
Under this system of thinking, my conclusions on infrastructure are sound. Again, it's mainly to serve as an additional balancing method in addition to the standard cost/buildtime/stats arrangement.
And to your opener, this is true. However, a Reaver/Lurker harass is meant to delay mining time by killing SCVs or forcing them to repair/rebuild. This draws no parallels to a Protoss or Zerg player who's virtually paralyzed (as I see it) when their supply lines are ravaged.
|
Two ideas of mine for upgrades of two already existing units.
OBSERVER:
Second mode of the Observer available after a tier 3 upgrade turning on an Arbiter-like cloaking field where Observer's shield acts as an energy pool (1 enegry point per 1 second of cloaking field). The drawback would be the Observer getting immobilized when in its second mode (maybe becoming visible, though it's too vulnerable for this, I think).
This would allow for a lot of versatility on the battlefield, and would add more harassment options. Protoss players would need to strategically distribute their Observers, and keep an eye on them in order to exploit this ability's full potential, while other races would be required to have even better map awareness in order to spot approaching Observers and act accordingly.
PHASE PRISM:
Recall upgrade (tier 3 probably) allowing it to recall pre-made Warp Gate units with no delay at cost of losing all Prism's energy (added after the upgrade's finished; energy starting pool, cost, etc. to be determined ) and the whole shield, making it vulnerable and usually unable to warp in reinforcements. This would be especially weak vs. Terrans with good map awareness and EMP use.
I know these might seem like just rehashed SC1 abilities, but I think keeping these fun, creative, and really deep mechanics in the upcoming sequel, but refreshed, would add a lot depth to the game.
Please, post your concerns. ^_________^V
|
I think Blizzard should make it so that people create their build orders ahead of time and then before you start the game, after you choose your race, you would select one of your build orders. People would create their build orders for each map by pulling something up similar to the campaign editor and could place their units in their 'base' (the size, location, and available resources would be determined by the creator of the map). There would have to be some restrictions on the things you could build though, such as first tier units only, not starting with a lair, or not starting with more than 10 supply. The first benefit of creating your build orders ahead of time would be that games would be shorter and have more action, which is good for both spectators and players. The second is that it would be easier to create, test, and share builds. A third benefit would be that it could improve the re-playability of the single player. I haven't decided whether or not it would be balanced, but I think it would be interesting if you could build in your allies' bases in team games. For beginners and new maps it might also be helpful to have default builds for each race (also would be made by the creator of the map).
|
I hope you're kidding. It wouldn't allow for scouting your opponent's BO, harassing him early on, BO mistakes, and a lot of different things...
|
is awesome32274 Posts
Make MBS a cheat. Single player. Activation code: ILOVEOOV
|
Nuke upgrades. Maybe make them have a wider radius upgrade, (at the cost of the Ghost almost certainly dieing, unless you are ready to move it asap), potency upgrade, and EMP Blast upgrade. (Keeps all buildings, even Terran and Zerg unpowered within an extremely long radius, and takes away all energy from spellcasters in the area also.)
|
Phase prism having a phase-out channeling ability that allows them to temporarily "remove" one enemy building, so you have an extra option for using prisms to overcome blockades coupled with warp-in and drops.
|
I return Terrans are allowed to drop their floating buildings, destroying them and anything beneath them.
|
The choice to control 2 players from start.
For example if im playing against 2 players that are weaker than me I can start as 2 players instead of one, I will start with 2 different hatcheries at different starting locations that will have separate resources. This will handicap me since i will need to macro more.
|
On February 21 2008 01:52 parkin wrote:
The choice to control 2 players from start.
For example if im playing against 2 players that are weaker than me I can start as 2 players instead of one, I will start with 2 different hatcheries at different starting locations that will have separate resources. This will handicap me since i will need to macro more.
I would want that, too but I don't think separate resource "banks" are needed, and if sending resources to allies is possible, then it would be useless.
|
Air units should not stack to prevent them from having a low critical mass, but there should be several layers air units could occupy(3 layers looks like a good number), so it will allow to keep 6-9 small air units close together in order to harrass, but 12 carriers wouldn't occupy the same space 3 vikings would on the ground.
|
On November 10 2007 01:28 Psycs wrote:
I've 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 or friendly units. Once cast on the targets units they would become buffed (either increased attack, defense, speed, or a combination thereof) for a short duration of time (maybe 15 seconds or so). The downside is that when the effect ends, the units would have their health reduced or maybe even 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, because it could back fire (specially if their speed has been increased).
It might be a little imbalanced if used together with dark swarm, however.
the buffing spell would be great for zerg. since they are ravaging biomonsters, a short term, life shortening spell to make them stronger would go great with their theme. like inducing rabies on them or something. but it does seem quite similar to stimpacks...
|
On November 10 2007 01:10 boudiou wrote:
Oh one more.. what does everyone think about a resource donating system?
disagree to the max. team games would be forever ruined. you just buff up one guy and it becomes a donated 1v1 or a defacto fast map. resource gathering, timing, bulid order... ALL of those factors that make the pro competitions so great will be thrown out the door. i think the game would sacrifice too much jsut for this one feature. resource sharing is definitely not a taboo in RTS, but it fits others, and not all. Ages would be a great game to do it, but in starcraft, it should stay out.
However, if it was a function that could be enabled through the editor for ums mode, i think that would be great for the editor; people could use that tool to make great ums maps. but not on melee/ffa. no sir.
|
it's about time cerebrates be more than a dummy structure!
With all of the great additions to the protoss and terran races, i got thinking, "what new units/features could zerg possibly get?" i was daunted and seemed stuck as to how zerg could be expanded and revamped. But once you realize their theme, namely evolution, swarming, ravaging with expendible masses, suddenly creative possibilies seemed to open up. There could be all sorts of new squirmy, spiney units. one example is when i saw a screenshot of zerglings, i didn't recognize them. they looked more like tongues. boom. zerg could have sort of an
advanced creep if you will that will affect units in some way, or be poisonous and constantly drain enemy hp, or totally have the ensnare ability! GOO! slime, slowing down! PERFECTLY synnergizes with zergs swarming all over them. after all, wouldn't marines and zealots get slowed down when they walk over thick, gooey bioslime?? (of course, as was endlessly discussed, all creep giving zerg units extra healing rate is one idea that i can't imagine not being implemented) thats just one exmample, but many new units could be based off of insects/arachnids. based on maybe
the horseshoe crab - maybe a plowing unit- slow movement speed, but with the help of ensnaring tongue-fur creep to slow enemies down, it instantly eats all bionic units when it moves over them. (defeinitely make it SLOW MOVING). It obviously needs the burrow ability. Doesn't having a monstrous zerg creature suddnely popping out of the ground instantly eating your comrades and troop while you're exploring through the creep really add to the suspense as well as the "fearsome zerg" theme so aptly? maybe they can give the unburrow aoe of death to the nydus worm when it pops out - it would make zerg base penetrations and invasions via nydusing/surprise attacking quite cool, and nicely synergistic with the whole idea of a drop/base penetration. i mean, did you see the nydus worm? it's huge! it's got to deal some damage, even if it's only in it's tiny area and only when it pops out.
beetles are a rich base for zerg units ideas.
another potential idea: A unit that has an ability to split itself (when it's hp is low) and create lots of tiny units (in effect an innate the broodling ability that creates a whole lot more broodlings than two). this would work best on big tanking units like the ultralisk. the ideas are endless =) Get creative and post your zerg ideas! I want to see blizzard unleash the zerg soon!
(sigh, if i was only part of the blizzard concept team... )
But one absolutely concrete idea right now ,IMO, that blizzard should NOT NO NEVER leave out is the cerebrate. The cerebrate is the freaken controller. the overmind's "mini-me" so i think they should do more than just sit around like it did in sc1. since they are the "mind" of the zerg, perhaps the cerebrate could have a wide range buff where it does something to all the zerg units in that range. (idk, use your imagination). OH! GREAT IDEA JUST NOW. it has a cooldown, and once in a while, maybe like the timespan for a nuke build, it can control other zerg units. in effect, a mindcontrol wave- aoe.i mena, thats what a cerebrate does right? emit psionic waves that control the zerg? i would imagine if zerg units controlled by one cerebrate suddenly got a psy-signal much stronger from another source 100 feet from it, compared to planets away it would get taken over. Maybe this could be extended to biological units of all races just to have it applicable to more than just the zerg; cerebrates evolved to extend their psionic abilities beyond the zerg to all bio units. tel me what u think!
cerebrates don't really move, so they could leave it remaining as a structure, but then again it's not like the overmind and cerebrates were suck on their home planet either. Maybe blizzard could do some sort of quasi-unit/structure, where it generally stays still, but DOES have the ability to move slightly, or infrequently.
|
I think it would be pretty neat if the nydus worms could attack, or at least damage units as it breaks surface. Also: remove the banshee helicopter crap, how is that supposed to work when different worlds have different atmospherical density? Make the medic flare not only reveal an area but temporarily blind all units in its aoe for, say, 5-7 seconds.
Make the nomad build turrents on sight rather than drop them off completed. Remove the complete fog of war, so that the entire map is visible but units are not, to encourage the playing of new maps. Give the twilight archon different abilities (and visuals) depending on what two templars were used to create it.
Remove the carrier from the effing game :p
|
On February 23 2008 07:57 Meh wrote:
Also: remove the banshee helicopter crap, how is that supposed to work when different worlds have different atmospherical density?
Of all the laws of physics that SC violates this is the one that bothers you ??
Mutalisk flapping their, too small to fly, wings in complete void is O.K. with you ?
Guardians flying in different directions, even in complete void, without any whatsoever visible way of propulsion, is O.K. with you ??
Space platforms in the middle of nowhere which still have gravity and crystalls growing out of them is O.K. with you ??
But the one thing that bothers you are the banshee's propelers...
Seriously people should stop using physics as an excuse for not liking something in a fictional world. If you don't like something just say so, don't find meaningless excuses.
|
the banshee is actually physically possible, at the basic level. double propellors counteract momentum so you don't need a horizonal tailpropellor. and when moving forward the two main propellors turn more horizontal to push the wind backwards.
haha but atmospheric density. good point
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Just a thought on how to make original units - mess up with target priorities. Example:
Well, let's say protoss have something big, armored and psychic. This something can run around with a small gun (not neglible like arbiters but not too damaging), but it can entrench itself into the ground and start emanating some psyching signals to whatever is around. Whatever is around becomes really nervous and will try to destroy that nasty emanator at all costs (it may sound stupid, but that is just the lore behind the unit idea). As a result, it's AI priority is set to maximum. So how it behaves in combat - unless the opponent specifically sets targets other units, his forces will first attack our entrenched fella, which is kinda what you want since it's armored as fuck. Note that this should not be similar to Giant's shout in war3 - that one messes up AI totally and this should just set a target priority that can and will be overridden if this thing is out of unit's immediate range.
Double propellers (banshee-design, not any double propellers) don't exactly counter-act momentum, they make the aircraft stable in air but at the same time they create a force that seeks to rip the banshee apart. Not really the best design, but it looks cool and technically it could fly, so I don't care.
|
On February 23 2008 05:16 gwho wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2007 01:10 boudiou wrote:
Oh one more.. what does everyone think about a resource donating system?
disagree to the max. team games would be forever ruined. you just buff up one guy and it becomes a donated 1v1 or a defacto fast map. resource gathering, timing, bulid order... ALL of those factors that make the pro competitions so great will be thrown out the door. i think the game would sacrifice too much jsut for this one feature. resource sharing is definitely not a taboo in RTS, but it fits others, and not all. Ages would be a great game to do it, but in starcraft, it should stay out. However, if it was a function that could be enabled through the editor for ums mode, i think that would be great for the editor; people could use that tool to make great ums maps. but not on melee/ffa. no sir.
This is so incredibly wrong I don't even know where to start...
Where the hell did you get the idea "you just buff up one guy and it becomes a donated 1v1 or a defacto fast map" from? Have you played WC3 or any other game that involves resource sharing? If you give your friend all your money there's a risk and reward, your ally gets stronger, but you can't do shit. Awesome, your ally now has 500 more minerals and gas and now you just died. Too bad you can't give him more resources since your dead. How will resource gathering, timing , and build order "go out the window" ? The game won't become some randomized shitfest. It's not like team games you will expand more than once in every game. (on standard 1v1 maps that is) If resource sharing will do anything at all, it will vary up strategies and all those build orders and timings you oh so cling on to (yeah there are so many builds and different strats a team can do in 2v2...right...). The only thing that someone should be afraid of with resource sharing is sharing resources in like the first few minutes of the game, where a zerg can get a super fast pool and kill off one guy.
|
On February 23 2008 08:29 Klouvious wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2008 07:57 Meh wrote:
Also: remove the banshee helicopter crap, how is that supposed to work when different worlds have different atmospherical density? Of all the laws of physics that SC violates this is the one that bothers you ?? Mutalisk flapping their, too small to fly, wings in complete void is O.K. with you ? Guardians flying in different directions, even in complete void, without any whatsoever visible way of propulsion, is O.K. with you ?? Space platforms in the middle of nowhere which still have gravity and crystalls growing out of them is O.K. with you ?? But the one thing that bothers you are the banshee's propelers... Seriously people should stop using physics as an excuse for not liking something in a fictional world. If you don't like something just say so, don't find meaningless excuses.
Well, yeah, most of the other things have vague excuses I can get onboard with. The Mutalisk wingspan may be just fine, we don't know how much it weighs or what it's insides are made of. We were recently told Overlords are filled with gas to keep them airborne, why not Mutalisks and Guardians too?
The Space platforms having gravity can get away with it because it's the future and it's high tech. Why do crystals "grow" on planets? We don't know (do we?), so why not on platforms as well?
Anyway, you're right, I shouldn't use physics as motivation to dislike something from Starcraft. The Banshee design sucks. Boo.
|
I think it would be great if Zerg could upgrade to spiked caraspace that allowed them to return melee damage. It would tie in to the whole idea of "Zerg" evolution perfectly.
I'm not sure how it holds for balance, since Terrans have no melee attackers. But maybe they can program it so that simply running by Zerg units would inflict damage.
|
On February 23 2008 10:58 Newbistic wrote:
I think it would be great if Zerg could upgrade to spiked caraspace that allowed them to return melee damage. It would tie in to the whole idea of "Zerg" evolution perfectly.
I'm not sure how it holds for balance, since Terrans have no melee attackers. But maybe they can program it so that simply running by Zerg units would inflict damage.
If I recall correctly there was a concept idea similar to that .. you're merely taking this from the Thorns aura of War3, and the concept idea from before was to introduce Vampiric (is that how you spell it?) Aura and allow Zerg units to regenerate health by killing units.
Honestly, it's a cute and adds a realistic approach to the Zerg race but I don't see it happening.
|
Zerg:
I like the idea of spiked carapaces to deal damage to melee attackers, but as you pointed out terran has no real melee...
Protoss:
Shields - shields no reduce damage %, means 3 upgrade levels 10%,20%,30% reduced damage
New upgrade for shield regeneration 2 levels :
First level doubles shield regeneration
Second level when unit takes no damage for like 10? seconds, starts to rapidly regenerate
->
Early regen uprades, more micro with withdrawing, second one damaged archons micro+recovery, damaged buildings recovery
% reduction - usefulness of shield upgrade, lategame compensation for weakness vs mass terran army with upgrades
Drawback is batteries became useless, but are not too useful as they are now anyway.
|
Setting rallies for individual larvae/eggs
you click on the larvae, set a rally, or you turn it into an egg, and set a rally. If no rally is set, it goes to the default hatchery rally
because I don't want my drones and overlords to go where my other units are going
|
Make another resource.... Pylons.
|
|
|
no seriously no replies about my suggestion? Is it too noobifying? It'll give macro users another action to perform, yay right?
|
idea #1)ultralisk has an explode ability. activated by player. can be used at full hp, 1 hp, or not at all, if they player isn't paying attention. makes for great exhibit for skill.
when ultraisk burst, 10 weak broodlings pop out, with half the strength of broodlings in BW.
something small, not very imbal at all. Fun, nice to see, and gets rid of the sadness of seeing an ultra go to waste.
But as somoene pointed out, broodlings wouldn't really have a niche, in the advent of banelings. But i would still like to see ultras get eaten and give out spores of masses of weak units.
idea #2)
A unit that eats enemy ground units instantly, regardless of hp, but can only eat one unit at a time, and it's rate of "chewing" is slow. definitely slow moving, and can only travel where there is creep. pretty nifty idea don't u think?
it's about time zerg had a creep-bound unit.
it's also about time they make the creep more than just land. make it do something.
Idea #3)
Acid colony: mutates from creep colony. Can ensnare units on creep by activating growth factors in the creep. Also releases corrosive toxins, damaging groudn units over time. This ensnare/poison ability can be cast only on contiguous creep.
oh dang, i already posted these ideas way above. but to complete the list
idea #4) Cerebrate. it does stuff. maybe overtakes other casting units. that's what cerebrates do after all.
|
On February 24 2008 15:08 caution.slip wrote:
Setting rallies for individual larvae/eggs
you click on the larvae, set a rally, or you turn it into an egg, and set a rally. If no rally is set, it goes to the default hatchery rally
because I don't want my drones and overlords to go where my other units are going
Great Idea. i tihnk the default hatchery rally point will work out smoothly. it's not noobifying at all. this is probably the biggest reason why people who hate zerg hate zerg.
post this up on the battle.net "questions 2" thread for karune to see.
|
On November 12 2007 20:15 lololol wrote: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).
i say we have resource trading, but with a heavily complex code like we have for money. we will have brackets with different rates, tracking the total amount transfered. We will have "government" restrictions on where gift money can be spent - (ex. only on bulidings). And we will have tax deductions you file to the IRS, when you spend it on certain things, like rebuliding your base if it two cc/nexus/hatch have been destroyed within the past 5 minutes, and you spend it on drones.
..... oh yes that would be beautiful.
i have a better idea, for starcraft AND for America. No taxes. (direct tax aka income tax) .Just scrap the original idea from which the comlpication. don't have a tax to begin with, and don't have resource trading to begin with.
ack, sry frozen arb, i multi posted again... but they're separate topics! ill be more conscientious of multiposting next time. my bad.
|
Regarding setting rallies for Zerg larvae, is there any source that actually states that Zerg will spawn units the same way it did in the original Starcraft, or are we all just assuming that the Zerg will function the "3 larvae" way.
Anyways, I think it'd be cool if they used the names 'Cargolisk' and 'Grudgling' for Zerg. I don't know what they'd do, but they sound cool.
|
On February 28 2008 13:38 Ozarugold wrote:
Anyways, I think it'd be cool if they used the names 'Cargolisk' and 'Grudgling' for Zerg. I don't know what they'd do, but they sound cool.
and they should have a unit called the defecator! it excretes a monstrous volume of highly viscous poo that engulfs and suffocates any unit.
The man that died in elephant dung will be a laughing stock in the Darnwin Awards no more, but a pioneer, a legend, and the first of a long line of heroes who answered the call. nature's call. or the freak thereof
|
Observer UI should really have the option to zoom further than the players can, this will really help pro match broadcasts IMO, because as it is now in SC:BW the observer has to constatnly move his screen around to capture bigger conflicts and being able to watch all of it on a single non-moving screen would be so much better!
|
On March 02 2008 23:33 lololol wrote:
Observer UI should really have the option to zoom further than the players can, this will really help pro match broadcasts IMO, because as it is now in SC:BW the observer has to constatnly move his screen around to capture bigger conflicts and being able to watch all of it on a single non-moving screen would be so much better!
this idea wins, although if its implemented i'm sure hackers could make it so you can zoom out as a player
but it'd be great for progaming
|
On March 03 2008 01:26 caution.slip wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2008 23:33 lololol wrote:
Observer UI should really have the option to zoom further than the players can, this will really help pro match broadcasts IMO, because as it is now in SC:BW the observer has to constatnly move his screen around to capture bigger conflicts and being able to watch all of it on a single non-moving screen would be so much better! this idea wins, although if its implemented i'm sure hackers could make it so you can zoom out as a player but it'd be great for progaming
If you ask me allowing even players to have a zoom out option would be pretty interesting and wouldn't make the game any "easier", have fun microing on a semi-minimap (or macro for that matter). It gives more control over to the player while not destroying any skill, so I wouldn't mind of players can have that as well. We already have the option to move our view and angles around.
|
yeah that idea is really cool, i've always wished i could zoom out while playing BW (the view screen is actually really small when u think about it, a huge portion of the 680x400 is taken up by the UI bar)
|
blizzard said in their initial press conference they were not considering allowing players to zoom out. In their minds, it created too big of a skill gap between skilled players and nonskilled players, as there would be a natural tendency to learn how to play the game at the most zoomed out level. I actually disagree with their reasoning, although I agree that zoom out should not be included. IMO, allowing zoom out decreases mental strain and multitasking... your visual attention is no longer divided among different parts of the map, it's far easier to order units around while keeping an eye on others, etc.
but allowing observers to zoom out would be cool, especially for television.
|
omg yes zoom out for observers would be SO awesome for watching the opposing armies trudging around the map and inevitably clashing in a game-deciding battle. so awesome!
|
Agreed. Zooming and changing camera perspectives are natural options, but they would only be for observers and watching replays. Blizzard has it right when they say that player perspective should be a fixed one, and also independent of resolution.
One could always do a ton of stuff with creep to make them more strategic, but that would also mean that defense could become too powerful in some cases, so with certain skeptiicism:
Zerg:
1) Sticky creep. Slows done enemy units slightly. May be too powerful even if only marginal, I dunno.
2) Entangling creep (catches a unit and slowly crushes it doing small but steady damage. Unit can no longer move and attack, but are also no longer auto-attacked and targeted by the zergs units. The roots holding the unit have little hp:s and can be destroyed freeing the unit or the rot and fall off when the creep colony dies.)
3) Acid creep. Small damage to all enemy units on top of it. But this may mess with medics of course..
4) Healing creep. Increases regen on friendly ground-units a bit.
etc..
But all of these attribute of course to making defense better which is perhaps not what Starcaft 2 needs. But some or a few new ideas regarding creeps would still be welcome if not too powerful.
Protoss:
The charge ability the zealot has should fit better with zerg. Just go for the usual leg upgrade please, and continue to have them in the role of frontliners and damagesoakers. It only makes sense since it's a melee unit.
Ability - "Shieldwall". A unit grouped with a few other units that is capable of transfering shield hp:s between units in range that are being damaged. Not instantaneous and a set rate (either logarithmic or set mount. Maybe also an activation treshold, like less than 50% left etc. These so that targetting a specific unit with many would still kill it fast, and it wouldn't be like a marinlot gangbanged by four medics.) Ability should probably belong to a "force multiplier unit", and not a regular combattant.
|
I kind of came up with a concept ability for the Dark Templar (pulled it out of my ass, naturally)
Basically, it's an assassination ability that allows DT's to infiltrate a cluster of units for better positioning.
The player must have vision of a group of enemy units. The ability allows the DT to walk through (much like WC3's windwalk, without the speed boost) units to reach a target that's completely surrounded by other enemy units, kill it, and then stand in its place. The point is that if the enemy doesn't have scan or isn't paying attention, the DT will be right in the middle of the group and are in a much better position to attack continuously.
The catch to this is that the DT can't just kill any unit in one swipe. The ability works only on units that the DT can normally already kill in one hit (well, maybe the ability grants some bonus damage, but only allows one-hit kill for units of up to ~80 hp). Of course, there is a cooldown rate, maybe 1 minute or something.
|
wc3??????????? this. is. starcraft!!!!! gtfo
|
I like the concept of tower upgrades. Terran can technically do it by putting cool stuff in bunkers (special abilities, etc.) I think it would be interesting if you could upgrade photon cannons in some way.
|
What I posted in another topic, regarding the medic change :
"I see that they have a real problem. Reapers are supposed to be strong, when going alone on raids, but then they will be seriously imbalanced when they go in with medics. Also, marines are supposed to be low health, low armor with up to medium-low health. Reapers are supposed to be also low health with higher armor. This way they'll benefit even more from medic support.
Another argument for ditching the medic is that its role in SC1 is totally superficial, its healing is totally unreal. I don't like the whole marine-medic dynamic that much anyway.
So I kind of like the new idea. Another one would be to tone down the medic heal, so that it wouldnt change battles and add other useful combat abilities. I kind of like this option as I'd like to see different abilities being used.
Also, they could make reapers repairable and not healable.
Or they could ditch the reaper and create something else. Maybe give the ability to marines, but pay for each upgrade separately. Maybe choose between jetpack and shield."
|
The messages when a unit completes(you can see them at the bottom left above the interface in the recorded matches) should not be individual, if several units of the same type finish building within let's say 5 seconds, it should just update the message and if there are 15 units built it will just add "x15" at the end of the message and not spam your screen with the same message over and over.
|
Zerg only has a single unit that can attack air, while terran and toss have two, so IMO a different hydra mutation that specializes in anti-air or have some sort of anti-air support ability will be a nice addition.
I imagine it like something with a lot of legs having a big head pointing up in the middle that catapults balls of acid, a single target attack that temporarily reduces the target's max hp by a set amount, so it's not too good vs heavy air, but deters low hp air unit harrasments OR instead of having a normal anti-air attack, it will have it as a spell and the ball instead of hitting a target will explode in an AoE rain of acid that deals some damage over time and lowers max hp. The unit will fight with the legs in melee against ground units and maybe have 2-3 armor, so it's good vs zerglings to reduce the effectivness of muta/ling in ZvZ. Original enough?
Zerg also doesn't have a heavy air unit that can attack both ground and air(a big slimy thing with tentacles that hatches and launches weaker scourge as projectiles comes to mind), as well as ground siege(something like the bugs in Starship Troopers) and since they would be a new and different compared to other zerg units, I would LOVE if they add such units.
A unit type lacking from all the races is a ground unit with anti-air support attack, i.e. one that's weaker than it's ground attack, there are only units using the same attack or having a more powerfull anti-air attack(for example, maraudeur using guns vs air and grenades vs ground).
|
I think that the whole mindset of Zerg is cheap, disposable, and numerous. the fact that they dont have many units that can attack air and land at the same time is blizzards way of balancing the game . note they took out the protoss dragoon and split it in two. the immortal only attacking ground, but having that stronger def then the original goon, and the stalker attacking air and ground but weaker and less defense then a goon. Blizzard now made the dragoon more balanced by making the user choose between two units for the job of one. If they add more anti air/ground units then they would have to get rid of some of the original or change their attack methods.
As for a heavy zerg air unit.... they have the ultralisk, I believe that that is a good enough power house for the zerg. they already have the corrupter, and plenty of other anti air units, I dont think that they will be adding anymore. with numbers powerhouses are amazing, simply because you either kill the strong unit or waste your time picking off the weak ones. both ways because zerg is disposable it will be easy for them to keep the heavy units alive.
I agree with you on the weak unit that is good against air. They did have the goliath, but it along with the valk were replaced with the viking... so that could kinda count.
|
On March 13 2008 22:34 Rhaegar wrote:
What I posted in another topic, regarding the medic change :
"I see that they have a real problem. Reapers are supposed to be strong, when going alone on raids, but then they will be seriously imbalanced when they go in with medics. Also, marines are supposed to be low health, low armor with up to medium-low health. Reapers are supposed to be also low health with higher armor. This way they'll benefit even more from medic support.
Another argument for ditching the medic is that its role in SC1 is totally superficial, its healing is totally unreal. I don't like the whole marine-medic dynamic that much anyway.
So I kind of like the new idea. Another one would be to tone down the medic heal, so that it wouldnt change battles and add other useful combat abilities. I kind of like this option as I'd like to see different abilities being used.
Also, they could make reapers repairable and not healable.
Or they could ditch the reaper and create something else. Maybe give the ability to marines, but pay for each upgrade separately. Maybe choose between jetpack and shield."
either that or when the medics heal, they along with what they are healing must stay stationary unable to attack.
I played a game where I MC'ed an scv and massed medics and manlots (3-3-3 zealots). my opinion that was kinda cheap. XD
I don't see why reapers would be not be allowed to heal, i dont really have a problem with that, as long as the medics cant heal each other. or what i said above.
|
hi im new here to the forums...sorry if this isn't the proper place to post this...this is my first post actually...T_T
well now that starcraft 2 has all 3 races in place i would like to post up some suggestions regarding cosmetics and attacks on certain units. i have been looking for a forum where to post my ideas. and i guess this looks like a cool place to post.^_^ some of you may agree or not agree with my ideas here. anyway here's what IMHO should be changed.
cosmetics:
ghost - the ghost has been one of the units to be revealed early. but i just cant seem to like the design. my idea is that the ghost should look more slimmer and have a smaller rifle. (current rifle seems to large). and how about interchanging the grey and black colors of the ghost. in that way they wouldn't look like someone going for an exercise or a power ranger.
marine - everything with the marine looks cool. except the shield. it just looks too plain and weak.
the jackal - looks like a tricycle from the future. well one reason i don't like this unit, is because its a step back to the technology the terran have. the vulture hovered. but now they use wheels? and they need to change the top cannon thingy. looks clumsy in its position.
starport - i think they should keep the unique concept of the starbase. a floating fortress. IMO it adds some really unique feel to the game. they should also give the option for the starbase to land or fly while making units. this building gives off the impression that the terrans finally have adapted to the constant battles they are at.
merchaven - should take the "BAR" sign off seriously...
protoss team colors - im not a fan with the different colored psi-blades and energy the protoss units give off. i still feel that starcraft 1 team colors work best. i feel the new color scheme kills the magnificence and elegance of the protoss warriors. the blue pylons, psi-blades, archon aura works really best with the protoss.
roach - this unit really has a neat concept except its name. the design could be confused with the new lurker...well i had this crazy idea of making the roach evolve from drones. it may be too far out for some. but i think it would bring an original and new concept with the zerg. anyway the roach looks like an evolved form of drone so why not...hehehehe
lurker - the lurker design for me doesn't look too intimidating. maybe it has something to do with the claws not sharp enough. and the head just looks to fat. it could use a more original and inspired feel like the ultralisk. (for me the ultraslisk model is really made of pure win)
infester - looks like an evolved "killer" tomato. i feel they can do better than that.
zerg hatchery, lair, hive - needs a more scarier and slicker look. imo right now its just too "CUTE" to be a zerg structure
now moving...on to attacks or skills:
thor - before people complained much about the thor overlapping the role of the siege tank. well after a lot of changes the thor has now become something like a giant goliath. and the official description given to the thor doesn't anymore fit the hype it had. though the new anti air skill is cool with regards to its size. but the ground attack IMO needs to be changed coz it looks weak. i think giving the thor a ground attack animation like "QUAKE 2's railgun" that could shoot through multiple units in a straight line would definitely give the thor justice. as to not overlap they could change the jackals attack animation to something that would suit its size. wouldn't it fit better for the mighty thor to have the jackals shoot through attack? if a giant unit like the ultralisk could attack multiple targets. why not the thor? it will surely give the justice that the mighty thor deserves.
overlord/overseer - i think they should keep the transport ability to the overlord. for me it adds more uniqueness or 2 options with regards to zerg transportation. i just couldn't see why they limit it to the nydus worms. it's like a step back from evolution. the protoss can summon their units in unique ways. why not give the zergs 2 options with transport. anyway they had it during starcraft one with the overlord and nydus canal. why not now?
infester - the infest ability for me seems kinda cheep. why not make them infest like the queen on selected buildings and buy the units instead of making units sprout out of nowhere. and i also thought of an ability if they would keep this model for the infester. how about if they gave the infester an ability like when they die, the infesters explode and produce small worm like things or a green smoke in a small area, that infects flesh type units and corrupts them. i think it would work well with this fat model they have if they had this ability.
lurker - they need more sharp spikes to make them more scary. a lot of people really hate the shark fins. it just doesn't give the lurker justice.
hydralisk - their attack rather looks weak. change the way their projectile looks. i always imagined the hydra's attack to be a spike with acid.
this is all i could think off now...i know its quite long but i just needed to get this out of my system. i hope this reaches out to the great guys at blizzard. i also hope that they won't hold back much with their great ideas. so that we would get more cooler results like what made starcraft such a hit. ^_^ all in all starcraft is following the right path and am excited like every other gamer with its release. peace ^_^
|
United States7166 Posts
A minor suggestion, but I really hope it's added: Let units retain their Kill Count statistic in the bottom panel! It was always cool to see that when observing sc1 matches, and quite informative on how effective a storm drop was etc
|
In SC1, I always wanted someway to better mico manage Zerglings, since there's so many of them and such a limited amount of control groups. Now that there's unlimited selection, I don't think it matters anymore, but I thought that it'd be cool to have some sort of grounded Overlord. It consumes units, like Zerglings, before battle and when they die, they explode and release them onto the enemy.
|
I was looking for an image of a keyboard and one of the buttons said "zerg rush" on it just for you but i couldn't find it .
one thing i hope they dont do is auto split, where you click on the minerals and your workers auto split for you. I liked how skill was involved in bw.
|
Autosplit would only ever matter at the very start of the game, and since you start with 6 workers, jumpstarting the early game, this will probably not matter much anyway.
|
I wish, they would bring back the reavers and give them a new ability to compensate for the lack of shuttles.
Like..the reaver would roll into a ball, metroid prime style and roll around dropping its reaver shots at its enemies, but with limited range. When it unravels it shoots with its high distance range but slow speed.
Dark archon should return, especially against Zerg, wouldn't mind a little mael here and there.
High templar/Dark templar merge into a Hybrid templar. It would have the characteristics of a high templar, but mobile, attack ability, and cloak like a dark templar with 33% more hp. It would have like a red psi storm, dealing more damage but costs more mana.
Also what I think would be cool is if terran reapers had mines you could throw onto large units only, dealing massive amount of damage. In order the enemy to remove them before they go boom, he would have to click the mini mines on the large unit and have fellow units around it attack it manually. Also would be cool if you toggle types of mines, from the spider mines to the timed mines. timed mines would do more damage, because it would require a better sense of timing and management than permanent idle ones.
For zerg, I dreamed of a zerg evolution of a deflier where it would transform into this 4 armed but tailed dragon-like being, about 7-8 feet tall but standing on two hind legs, and it would spout cyclones of swarm at target location, reducing the enemy's speed and armor brutally, but very short, like 2-3 seconds.
|
United States7166 Posts
On March 14 2008 08:19 Zuan19 wrote:
one thing i hope they dont do is auto split, where you click on the minerals and your workers auto split for you. I liked how skill was involved in bw.
Autosplit is slower than manually splitting in SC2.
(how it actually works is if you select all 6 workers and right click 1 mineral at start, they all try to mine that mineral but then split up after they realize it's being mined)
Which is actually how SC1 works with the additional case where sometimes workers just wait at the mineral to mine it rather than trying to find a new one
|
ooh I got another idea in my head:
It goes like a zergling is hiding above a cliff without the units below noticing because of the elevation and fog of war, and when the time is right, the zergling leaps down to the cliff for a surprise attack, giving a 1-2 second attack advantage.
Also would be cool for zealot jumps onto tanks and such, none of that evil tank below cliff turret stuff
Reapers already have such ability but with greater mobility, would be cool if there was a static jump like that..
|
There have been too many sarcastic "and lets fit all units with jetpacks and laserscythes" already. Which is a shame, I liked that joke. But its hard not to rip on other peoples ideas. Its part of the online experience.
I think hydralisks should be able to evolve wings, so that they could leap onto enemy aircraft and scratch up their windshields so that they couldn't see anything, and then you would have to drop marines onto the ship with a dropship to get rid of them, and then you would have to send an engineer to replace the windshield, but you would have to buy the Surefooted upgrade first so that he wouldn't fall down, but if he did he would be able to parachute and turn into a marine, only with screwdrivers and wrenches instead of guns, and he would be able to repair vehicles in combat, just like an scv, and he would be able to mine minerals and gas in your base, just like an scv, and he would be able to build bunkers and turrets, just like an scv, and he would be able to throw mines onto large units only, dealing massive amount of damage, and in order for the enemy to remove them before they go boom, he would have to click the mini mines on the large unit and have fellow units around it attack it manually, and also it would be cool if you could toggle types of mines, from the spider mines to the timed mines, and timed mines would do more damage, because it would require a better sense of timing and management than permanent idle ones, and also some units should have a really ridiculous ability that would require too much micro and make the game nothing like starcraft and also, you know what, you should remove this unit or that ability from the current build please because I don't like it.
Oh snap, I went there >_<
|
I'll feel bad if I don't contribute myself though, giving somebody a chance to rip on me, so here goes:
Remove the Reaper. Give his cliffjumping ability to the Ghost (though with a slicker appearance than the backpack thrusters, which I didn't care for to begin with), making it more of the specialist it's supposed to be. We got dropships, vikings and drop-pods as easy ways of getting into the enemy base and starting shit, I don't see the point of the reaper, as his only role seems to be in the very early game, and that role I think could be better filled by ghosts.
|
On March 14 2008 06:38 earl_xian wrote:
hi im new here to the forums...sorry if this isn't the proper place to post this...this is my first post actually...T_T
well now that starcraft 2 has all 3 races in place i would like to post up some suggestions regarding cosmetics and attacks on certain units. i have been looking for a forum where to post my ideas. and i guess this looks like a cool place to post.^_^ some of you may agree or not agree with my ideas here. anyway here's what IMHO should be changed.
cosmetics:
ghost - the ghost has been one of the units to be revealed early. but i just cant seem to like the design. my idea is that the ghost should look more slimmer and have a smaller rifle. (current rifle seems to large). and how about interchanging the grey and black colors of the ghost. in that way they wouldn't look like someone going for an exercise or a power ranger.
marine - everything with the marine looks cool. except the shield. it just looks too plain and weak.
the jackal - looks like a tricycle from the future. well one reason i don't like this unit, is because its a step back to the technology the terran have. the vulture hovered. but now they use wheels? and they need to change the top cannon thingy. looks clumsy in its position.
starport - i think they should keep the unique concept of the starbase. a floating fortress. IMO it adds some really unique feel to the game. they should also give the option for the starbase to land or fly while making units. this building gives off the impression that the terrans finally have adapted to the constant battles they are at.
merchaven - should take the "BAR" sign off seriously...
protoss team colors - im not a fan with the different colored psi-blades and energy the protoss units give off. i still feel that starcraft 1 team colors work best. i feel the new color scheme kills the magnificence and elegance of the protoss warriors. the blue pylons, psi-blades, archon aura works really best with the protoss.
roach - this unit really has a neat concept except its name. the design could be confused with the new lurker...well i had this crazy idea of making the roach evolve from drones. it may be too far out for some. but i think it would bring an original and new concept with the zerg. anyway the roach looks like an evolved form of drone so why not...hehehehe
lurker - the lurker design for me doesn't look too intimidating. maybe it has something to do with the claws not sharp enough. and the head just looks to fat. it could use a more original and inspired feel like the ultralisk. (for me the ultraslisk model is really made of pure win)
infester - looks like an evolved "killer" tomato. i feel they can do better than that.
zerg hatchery, lair, hive - needs a more scarier and slicker look. imo right now its just too "CUTE" to be a zerg structure
now moving...on to attacks or skills:
thor - before people complained much about the thor overlapping the role of the siege tank. well after a lot of changes the thor has now become something like a giant goliath. and the official description given to the thor doesn't anymore fit the hype it had. though the new anti air skill is cool with regards to its size. but the ground attack IMO needs to be changed coz it looks weak. i think giving the thor a ground attack animation like "QUAKE 2's railgun" that could shoot through multiple units in a straight line would definitely give the thor justice. as to not overlap they could change the jackals attack animation to something that would suit its size. wouldn't it fit better for the mighty thor to have the jackals shoot through attack? if a giant unit like the ultralisk could attack multiple targets. why not the thor? it will surely give the justice that the mighty thor deserves.
overlord/overseer - i think they should keep the transport ability to the overlord. for me it adds more uniqueness or 2 options with regards to zerg transportation. i just couldn't see why they limit it to the nydus worms. it's like a step back from evolution. the protoss can summon their units in unique ways. why not give the zergs 2 options with transport. anyway they had it during starcraft one with the overlord and nydus canal. why not now?
infester - the infest ability for me seems kinda cheep. why not make them infest like the queen on selected buildings and buy the units instead of making units sprout out of nowhere. and i also thought of an ability if they would keep this model for the infester. how about if they gave the infester an ability like when they die, the infesters explode and produce small worm like things or a green smoke in a small area, that infects flesh type units and corrupts them. i think it would work well with this fat model they have if they had this ability.
lurker - they need more sharp spikes to make them more scary. a lot of people really hate the shark fins. it just doesn't give the lurker justice.
hydralisk - their attack rather looks weak. change the way their projectile looks. i always imagined the hydra's attack to be a spike with acid.
this is all i could think off now...i know its quite long but i just needed to get this out of my system. i hope this reaches out to the great guys at blizzard. i also hope that they won't hold back much with their great ideas. so that we would get more cooler results like what made starcraft such a hit. ^_^ all in all starcraft is following the right path and am excited like every other gamer with its release. peace ^_^
This post is very much made of win! And I thought I was the only one that hated the ghost and its rifle.
|
I would like some things incorporated in the game regarding the UI and customization options:
1) Customizable team colors. In WC3 when you switch this on your units are Blue and the Enemy is RED. In SC1 your units are Teal and Enemy is Red. I would love an option that lets me setup the preferred colors i.e. my units being Violet and the enemy Orange.
2) An option that lets you use the "classic" SC1 cursor. I'm not saying the SC2 cursor look bad, its just that i don't like it, and I'm not saying change it (I'm sure some like it), I just want an option to use the old one, i like it better.
3)I would love if in SC2 you can see a timer on top of the screen (i think this is already in, not sure), also i would love to see a APM tracker, like the ADV launcher provides. just a number under your supply count that shows your APM.
These are all UI suggestions, they do not affect gameplay, its just giving ppl customization options and let them setup the game according to their own preferences.
I would love to see feedback on these ideas, the most successfull games in eSport history were very customizable (except for SC1) and that made them great (especially Q3, you could setup everything to your own liking, without affecting gameplay, just your own perception).
|
On March 15 2008 04:19 eugen1225 wrote:
I would like some things incorporated in the game regarding the UI and customization options:
1) Customizable team colors. In WC3 when you switch this on your units are Blue and the Enemy is RED. In SC1 your units are Teal and Enemy is Red. I would love an option that lets me setup the preferred colors i.e. my units being Violet and the enemy Orange.
2) An option that lets you use the "classic" SC1 cursor. I'm not saying the SC2 cursor look bad, its just that i don't like it, and I'm not saying change it (I'm sure some like it), I just want an option to use the old one, i like it better.
3)I would love if in SC2 you can see a timer on top of the screen (i think this is already in, not sure), also i would love to see a APM tracker, like the ADV launcher provides. just a number under your supply count that shows your APM.
These are all UI suggestions, they do not affect gameplay, its just giving ppl customization options and let them setup the game according to their own preferences.
I would love to see feedback on these ideas, the most successfull games in eSport history were very customizable (except for SC1) and that made them great (especially Q3, you could setup everything to your own liking, without affecting gameplay, just your own perception).
I approve of 1), I approve of 2) but I'm not so much onboard with 3). Knowing when to do what is part of the game sense, timing, and putting a timer up there would basically just be catering to noobs, making it easier for them to copy/paste some pro build they saw on TV, drawing out what might otherwise be a quick game. You could have a stopwatch at your computer of course, but I'd rather not see this implemented into the ui. I'd be fine with an in-game clock though, showing the current local time in hours and minutes.
|
This post is very much made of win! And I thought I was the only one that hated the ghost and its rifle.
[/QUOTE]
thank you so much for seeing my point of view on things.^_^
i wish the best for this game. blizzard is welcome to listen to my ideas and try to check it out in future builds. after all they said it themselves. "everything is not yet set in stone". i just gave my 50cents. if it works, then great. but if not, at least i tried.and i also hope that we also as a community would give a chance to some great ideas coming from the creators of the game. coz sometimes nasty comments about wanting "ALL" things to be like starcraft 1 could as well hinder the creativity coming from the creators minds.
we don't need a "broodwar 3D". let's stop living in the past and get ready to embrace the future that is starcraft 2.(: go blizzard dev team!!!^_^
|
At Meh sweeden
As you said you can have a stop watch at you computer (I did untill i instaled the ADV loader), so why not implement it in game?
Local time is ok as well, you can still time things (the point of having a clock).
I think it will elevate the game more. Knowing the exact build times, when you see a building go up, you presume the reason he made it (what unit) and you can already in your mind know how much time it requires to make that unit and react acording to it, make precision attacks (calculating the exact sec a templar spawns and kill it with mutas i.e.).
This is no easy task, just like in Q3, when you have map control and know spawn timings you can have an egde over your enemy and can ambush your enemy knowing he is coming for the spawning armor etc. This made Q3 the amazing game it is, i don't think it will ruin SC2, i think it will deepen it, calculating small things on a digital clock isn't that easy, adding seconds to a minute:second clock, when you keep track of a lot of things, and micro/macro all the time its easy to get lost, so its not making the game simpler, it adds to it and opens new possibilities.
|
I have a vague memory of this being suggested and shot down already, just remind me why:
Different genders for all units. When making any given unit, it has an equal chance of coming out as a male or a female. What was the problem with this again? The voices? Because if this is not doable then at least make all ghosts girlies, because they do better in spandex.
|
So, there's been a lot of talk about MBS. Spefically how it leaves people with too little to do, macro-wise. That quote from Dustin Browder made it sound like they were looking for something else to do on macro, but hadn't found anything yet.
My idea is to make it so that buildings are cheaper, but units take longer to build. That way, in order to get an army of the size that you'd want, you'd have to make a TON of buildings to do so. And you'd have to constantly be going back to your base to do this.
|
That would adversely affect mapmaking, as you'd have to make tons of room for those buildings.
|
On March 14 2008 13:10 Zelniq wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2008 08:19 Zuan19 wrote:
one thing i hope they dont do is auto split, where you click on the minerals and your workers auto split for you. I liked how skill was involved in bw.
Autosplit is slower than manually splitting in SC2. (how it actually works is if you select all 6 workers and right click 1 mineral at start, they all try to mine that mineral but then split up after they realize it's being mined) Which is actually how SC1 works with the additional case where sometimes workers just wait at the mineral to mine it rather than trying to find a new one
really? From the terran gameplay video (official from blizzard) it looked as though they all just went straight for their own patches
|
Zerglings make to much noise. After watching the highdef quality of the zerg gameplay I noticed the drowned out all other noises.
|
On March 15 2008 14:40 Meh wrote:
That would adversely affect mapmaking, as you'd have to make tons of room for those buildings.
Hmm... what if you made the buildings smaller, too?
|
On March 15 2008 18:33 caution.slip wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2008 13:10 Zelniq wrote:On March 14 2008 08:19 Zuan19 wrote:
one thing i hope they dont do is auto split, where you click on the minerals and your workers auto split for you. I liked how skill was involved in bw.
Autosplit is slower than manually splitting in SC2. (how it actually works is if you select all 6 workers and right click 1 mineral at start, they all try to mine that mineral but then split up after they realize it's being mined) Which is actually how SC1 works with the additional case where sometimes workers just wait at the mineral to mine it rather than trying to find a new one really? From the terran gameplay video (official from blizzard) it looked as though they all just went straight for their own patches
In newer gameplay videos they all head to the same block first tho.
|
On March 14 2008 12:35 ._. wrote:
I wish, they would bring back the reavers and give them a new ability to compensate for the lack of shuttles.
Like..the reaver would roll into a ball, metroid prime style and roll around dropping its reaver shots at its enemies, but with limited range. When it unravels it shoots with its high distance range but slow speed.
That is such a good idea. Wow, someone get this guy over to Blizzard. I would implement this idea for the Immortals though. It might be too Star Wars though. Don't remember what they are called but they pretty much roll into battle and have similar shields to the Immortals. Of course you would have to redesign them a bit, but that would be sick.
|
Is it just me, or does anyone not have a problem with the new ghost 'nuclear launch detected' MASSIVE ground spraypaint. Will enemies beable to see this, or just the red dot?!
|
On March 16 2008 19:27 shublar wrote:
Is it just me, or does anyone not have a problem with the new ghost 'nuclear launch detected' MASSIVE ground spraypaint. Will enemies beable to see this, or just the red dot?!
The enemy wil just see a small read dot
|
I would like to see the Jackal have an attack similar to that of the mutalisk, except that:
A) They shoot what the vulture shoots, i.e. the fragmentary grenade for 20 damage.
B) The fragmentary grenade does a small amount of splash and splits off into two more small grenades that head for nearby targets.
C) The small grenades do half the damage of the fragmentary grenade and do splash as well.
This would make the Jackal different from the Lurker and the Mutalisk, and make them much more effective against mass zerglings, and even act as a slight counter for Immortals. The 3 sources of damage will increase the effectiveness of the Jackal against the Immortals, otherwise Terran pushes will be utterly crushed by Immortal-Lot. This would force the protoss to add Stalkers to the mix, which lets Terran use siege tanks again.
|
- Link a replay file to a mp3 file in the load replay dialog. So we can watch a replay with commentary without having to "pause at 15sec... go!"
- The map editor should allow us to write scripts that can change the map terrain (tileset, add/remove water, mountains, ramps etc) before terrain is loaded. This way we can either write random maps, or write campaign maps that change it's form depending on what the user is doing.
- In the current build, zerg got only nydus worm/canal as transport so they have no air transport for island maps. I suggest Drones gets to mutate into a flying unit that can fly/land similar to the viking. Thus allowing zerg to either use it expand or to build on overlord made creep and then offensively use the Queen's Deep Tunnel. These flying drones could be expensive and slow, for the sake of balance.
|
Concept: Terran reactor v 2.0 (maximizing macro play for experienced players).
Just something I was thinking about when I saw a post somewhere that mentioned that the terran building upgrade called reactors would no longer allow production of 2 units at once but rather increased the production queue (wich is completely useless if you ask me, even counter productive).
The way I was thinking the reactor could work is, it would give a boost in the unit building time but in order to do so , a SCV would have to be moved inside the reactor (make a small animation with a door that lets the SCV inside). Once the SCV enters the reactor, the production speed of the next unit from that facility is increased.
Once the unit is finished being produced, the SCV is ejected from the reactor, requiring the players attention to send it back inside another time if he wants to speed up the production for the next unit in queue. This would add an element of skill, as micromanagement of the SCV would require the players attention everytime he wants to "boost" the production of units.
This is also a nice way of optimizing macro play for experienced players and takes no advantage of the MBS feature, rather requiring the player to actually perform mechanical manoeuvres with the mouse (by sending the scv inside the reactor) in order to boost unit production.
|
On March 19 2008 07:51 Famehunter wrote:
Concept: Terran reactor v 2.0 (maximizing macro play for experienced players).
Just something I was thinking about when I saw a post somewhere that mentioned that the terran building upgrade called reactors would no longer allow production of 2 units at once but rather increased the production queue (wich is completely useless if you ask me, even counter productive).
The way I was thinking the reactor could work is, it would give a boost in the unit building time but in order to do so , a SCV would have to be moved inside the reactor (make a small animation with a door that lets the SCV inside). Once the SCV enters the reactor, the production speed of the next unit from that facility is increased.
Once the unit is finished being produced, the SCV is ejected from the reactor, requiring the players attention to send it back inside another time if he wants to speed up the production for the next unit in queue. This would add an element of skill, as micromanagement of the SCV would require the players attention everytime he wants to "boost" the production of units.
This is also a nice way of optimizing macro play for experienced players and takes no advantage of the MBS feature, rather requiring the player to actually perform mechanical manoeuvres with the mouse (by sending the scv inside the reactor) in order to boost unit production.
I like this idea! If blizzard wants to have MBS in their games, but looking for ways to keep macro up, they need to implement ideas like this
|
I had this random idea.... for race selection...
T
Z
P
Random
Not P
Not Z
Not T
What do you think? It would allow for users for play two races to still get that degree of randomness...
|
|
|
Does anyone think that if a unit steps on a reaper's mine it should just explode right away? Right now it just looks like units can run away with ease and it would make it more interesting imo.
Edit: Of course this won't work on units that float.
|
On March 19 2008 15:41 Umbrella wrote:
Does anyone think that if a unit steps on a reaper's mine it should just explode right away? Right now it just looks like units can run away with ease and it would make it more interesting imo.
Edit: Of course this won't work on units that float.
Disagree. Its interesting when you put mines on someone and then watching if the other player reacts accordingly or gets owned. Its interesting (and requires skill) to time putting bombs down on an opponent's advance path (or retreat path) and then having the bombs go boom right when they're over them
actually this depends on whether or not the bombs are visible, but making them explode on contact turns them into nothing more than nukes
|
On March 19 2008 13:35 Liquid_Turbo wrote:
I had this random idea.... for race selection...
T
Z
P
Random
Not P
Not Z
Not T
What do you think? It would allow for users for play two races to still get that degree of randomness...
Just what i have thought about to!
Plz blizzard, include that feature!!!
|
my2cents:
I was trawling through a few sites with details about all the current "new" units in the most recent build, and I was concerned to find High Templars with no new abilities. I thought they might need a new spell to jazz them up a bit, I was hoping they could have either
Psi-Blast
This ability would cost a lot of energy but hitting one target for a reasonable amount of hitpoints. This might make them a good counter to capital ships, or large massive ground units.
Psi-Shield
This ability would make the templar project a field infront of the templar, (in close proximity), and is also a channeled spell. This shield would be impassable by enemy units, and is active for 15 seconds, but will terminate earlier if the templar is killed. The idea behind this ability is to stop the progression of an enemy attack or to create some kind of distraction whilst making an assault. Bear in mind the high templar is very slow so is most likely to be killed when the shield goes down anyway.
I know originally they did have Forcefield and Anti-gravity, but in the current build, it is moved to the new nullifier unit. I know many units are staying the same but I just hope they add something to give it more potential.
|
Something kinda usefull for the zerg ui would be to be able to have an icon somewhere on the screen that displays the number of idle larvas. Maybe also a counter or some sort of progression bar on the hatcheries that tells you the time until another larvae will spawn. Maybe the queen could also have an ability that makes her lay eggs that eventually pop into additional larvas.
|
My sole wish would be to have a real 3D game and not a 2D RTS build in a 3D engine.
|
On March 24 2008 05:16 Boonbag wrote:
My sole wish would be to have a real 3D game and not a 2D RTS build in a 3D engine.
Have you tried the homeworld series. There are other 3d games. Another concept with potential is the old Dungeonkeeper series extended in 3d tunnesystems and surfaceworld/air/oceans. Unfortunately all these games didn't have much strategical depth.
|
I know what you mean. What I meant is a little different than that. Let's pick starcraft. Name the total of all the game rules the rule engine. In starcraft, as in warcraft 2, the rule engine will process in a 2d environement, with and with only rules designed to process in this given 2d environement.
Anything determined in the course of actions by the overall process of the rule engine will match and meet it's result until the extreme boundaries of the environement engine. If i were to use an image it would turn like this :
Imagine a two blank sheets of paper of exact same size, each sheet having displayed in the exact same way ranks of glue plots. Match & meet would mean then having these two sheets falling exactly on top of each other and having every single glue plot sticking with its mirored plot.
Let's pick warcraft 3 now.
You basically have here, a 2d Rule Engine, more or less, exactly designed in the same fashion than the likes of its 2D anscestors. But then, you now get a 3d environement, where the 2d rule engine is supposed to apply.
So what you get is that sort of feeling of unacuracy, and global mess, in fights, in the unit's movement to a designed place.
These feeling are not a matter of taste at all, but a direct perception of that unused 3rd dimension by the overall course of things.
I'm afraid they just repeat this shit again in Starcraft 2 and make again, yet a fun and cool game, but where the global randomness unables it to access that accurate and "kind of perfect" scale stracraft was on.
|
1) ability to select more than one enemy/allied unit for information purposes. you can only clikc one enemy unit at a time, which means you can't get a good feel for a pack of enemy units. why not allow multiple enemy unit selection for visual only?
2) B.net - when friend joins a game, and it pops up " your firend has joined _____" create a hyperlink for the game name so ou can join instantly. everyone knows how much of a headache it is to get 5+ people into a game someone else created.
|
On March 25 2008 10:51 gwho wrote:
1) ability to select more than one enemy/allied unit for information purposes. you can only clikc one enemy unit at a time, which means you can't get a good feel for a pack of enemy units. why not allow multiple enemy unit selection for visual only?
2) B.net - when friend joins a game, and it pops up " your firend has joined _____" create a hyperlink for the game name so ou can join instantly. everyone knows how much of a headache it is to get 5+ people into a game someone else created.
1. There's something I dislike about that idea but I have no idea how to put it into words. Hmm.
2. That would be an interesting idea. I hate it when I miss a "!" or something while trying to join a friend's game. I also wouldn't see this as obstructive in any way either seeing as it can just say something like, "Your friend Equinox_kr has joined a Starcraft 2 game called 'Die noob die'." (Follow)
And clicking on the button would immediately send you into the game as well.
|
to create more room for unit micro, it would be nice if different size of control group would be controlled by different unit behavior. for example, if you have 6 or less mutas, they will clump up. but if you have 7 or more mutas, they wont clump up, and will instead display swarm behavior.
similarly, having 6 or less vultures causes them to maintain formation and can be microed like normal. but when you have more than 6 vultures, they will break formation and can't be microed.
same can be done for all units: dragoons, wraiths, tanks, etc.
|
On March 26 2008 08:38 Polyphasic wrote:
to create more room for unit micro, it would be nice if different size of control group would be controlled by different unit behavior. for example, if you have 6 or less mutas, they will clump up. but if you have 7 or more mutas, they wont clump up, and will instead display swarm behavior.
similarly, having 6 or less vultures causes them to maintain formation and can be microed like normal. but when you have more than 6 vultures, they will break formation and can't be microed.
same can be done for all units: dragoons, wraiths, tanks, etc.
Ummm, this idea doesn't seem good at all. It just adds some nuisance and superficial way to somehow "add" more micro. You kind of remove micro if you cant control more than 6 guys at once, it takes away control from the player if you ask me.
From the sound of the reports we got, I think micro is going in the right direction
|
I think there could be periodical Map contests. Blizzard staff would choose one map say every week from the community, to take part in the official ladder map list.
I know thousands of people would love this
|
I posted this one on a thread about how to make the game more strategical for new players. Which I concluded would be done by teaching them how to play by showing them, on an easy to digest way, how top players do it. Figured it should be posted here as well:
Make replays from top players more readily available to any random guy standing on battle.net, who never bothered to read some starcraft forums about what "progaming" is, give these guys an easy way to watch how pro players do it.
- Save the replay from the last 20 or so games from top ladder players in the battle.net server
- Put a button labeled "Watch top ladder game" on bnet. When clicked would show a list of 20+ games.
- Those replays would be hosted by the server and would only playing after a number of players are watching it.
- This would be done, instead of simply downloading the replays and watching them individually client-side, just to force player interection. Just to make that guy who never bothered to look after "pro gaming" on googgle to ask on observer chat:
"hey guyz what is that zerg doing??"
"dunno I never saw that in dota"
"lol noobs that's called an expansion"
and so on they would start learning how the game actually works.
- After the match he would be able to save the replay and watch it again later.
If any of you ever played GuildWars. It had a very similar system where anywhere in game, the most careless about progaming newbie ever could just press "B" in his interface, that would put him in oBserver mode for a tournament match between the top players in the world. Usually sharing comments with those same guys who just finished playing that match and now want to watch it together. That is a HUGE learning exercise for any new player.
|
An Ideal for carries.
You should be able to build different kind of "interceptors"
I was thinking either one choise is standard interceptor, and the other is a bomber type who deploys plasma bombs in a straight line and would have to dock each time to reload or w/e
or choise to: the bomber (who can only attack land) and some type of interceptor that only attacks air.
This can be balanced with numbers of plains and cost
edit: and if u start to build bombers, you cant mix in with interceptor
|
A suggestion to help out the needed macro for protoss:
What if instead of gateways you could only build warpgates. That way mbs would allow you to select all warpgates, but you'd still have to click each spot where you want to create each unit. But the problem is I don't know how they could balance out in early game if the protoss just decides to proxy a pylon and own early game. =[
|
"Ultimate/HERO" units?
Ok.
Zerg has their Queen unit which in a way plays like a hero. From a gameplay video, the queen can be seen coming up out of burrowing and easily picking off 6-7 marines. I'm not sure if you can create multiple Queens though... Can anyone confirm?
Protoss has their Mothership of which they can have only 1 on the field at any given time. It's ultra powerful and has the amazing "Time Bomb" ability allowing it to slow down all incoming projectiles. Also, it can create a "warphole" that can suck in all flying units. And "Planet Cracker" just looks devasting...
But how about the Terrans? I'd say the Thor is their ultimate unit, but since you can create multiple Thor's, its then not considered a "Hero" unit. Do the Terrans have a Queen/Mothership equivalent?
Now don't jump on me and say that Starcraft II is not about heros, but massive armies battling massive armies. But from what I've seen in the videos, the Zerg Queen and the Protoss Mothership seem like "Hero" units to me...
|
You can build more than one mothership and Blizzard has no idea what kind of spells to put on it...
If this were my game, I'd revert the MS all the way to its original state, only make Black Hole take a few seconds to emerge, allowing you to micro out of the way. That would make it completely balanced. I've no idea why Blizzard removed BH and then kept changing around the spells because they didn't know what to do with it.
As for queens, I'd force them to stay on the creep where they were spawned, and allow one queen per hatchery. The unit in its current state makes no sense.
|
One simple suggestion: add a "Classic cursor" interface option check button that would just change the in-game mouse cursor graphic to the SC1 classic one. Easy to implement and I'm sure many people would love it ^^
As for queens, I'd force them to stay on the creep where they were spawned, and allow one queen per hatchery. The unit in its current state makes no sense. The Queen is FAR from a hero. From what I've gathered watching the vods and reading feedback, she is much more like a second worker than an actual hero. She's just a worker specified for base defense, who can eventually be morphed into a powerful warrior to help in defense even further. Really, she costs 150 mineral, builds faster than a zealot and dies about as fast as one. That is far from a super powerhouse that would overpower your army.
I like been able to use her offensively. The more offensive harass we can = more multi-tasking = more speed = more skill needed = good. She would work well with the overlord creep ability for proxy towers / toxic creep on workers / deep tunnel harassing.
But I do like the idea of been able to make 1 per hatchery. Would need to tone down her abilities a bit. But I surely would prefer 1 per hatchery approach over 1 unit ever, which would greatly value macroing for zergs.
|
I would like a zerg unit that walks like a lurker but instead of burrowing and attacking it can morph into a slimy ramp or a bridge. It would be fun to morph 5 ramps into the enemies base and just swarm the place from all directions.
I also would like to see a command to unselect a unit from a control group. If you have 12 marines on hotkey 1 and you want to send 3 of them out in different directions to scout.. It would be nice to be able to unselect them from hotkey 1 directly.
|
On April 01 2008 02:34 MultiMarine wrote:
I also would like to see a command to unselect a unit from a control group. If you have 12 marines on hotkey 1 and you want to send 3 of them out in different directions to scout.. It would be nice to be able to unselect them from hotkey 1 directly. Press 1 hotkey, then Shift + click 3 guys out of group, then Ctrl + 1? Or is it not what you mean?
|
I know it can be done. But i want a better way of doing it. You get 3 random units doing it your way for example. And if the units are in 3 different control groups it becomes a total mess.
|
On April 01 2008 02:56 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2008 02:34 MultiMarine wrote:
I also would like to see a command to unselect a unit from a control group. If you have 12 marines on hotkey 1 and you want to send 3 of them out in different directions to scout.. It would be nice to be able to unselect them from hotkey 1 directly. Press 1 hotkey, then Shift + click 3 guys out of group, then Ctrl + 1? Or is it not what you mean?
select a unit, and shift + controlgroup number unselects them imo ~~
it's already in starcraft!
|
i had an idea
the scv disassemble command
once the building is disassembled, the scv changes appearance to look like it´s carrying something
it must bring its load to a command centre for the salvaged materials to be delivered
if it is killed along the way, the materials are lost
|
New Unit Idea:
Upgrade from Dropship (purchasable for each dropship)
Dropship
100 Minerals/100 Gas
Carrying Capacity: 8
160 HP
2 Armor
Upgrade for the Dropship:
Gunship Upgrade
Requires the dropship to "land" for a time, about 10 seconds, in order to add the extra armor/capabilities/engines. During this time it cannot move and is vulnurable to ground attack, but not air. After this time, it turns into a fully operationable gunship.
(+100 Minerals, 25 Gas)
The Gunship gains +50 HP and + 2 Armor, but it can now only carry infantry units and it's capacity is reduced to 4. However, the infantry onboard the gunship can now shoot outside of it using the firing slits. Due to the high altitude and velocity of the Gunship, all weapons range are reduced by 1 instead of increased.
Essentially, you're paying 200 minerals and 125 gas, or 3/4ths of an ultralisk, to get a 250 HP flying thing that can do about 24 damage/second at a smaller range. It's essentially a flying ultralisk, as an ultralisk's attack speed is equal to that of the marines. Not to mention the 4 marines that should be put inside, and you're looking at a 300/125 expensive unit that can easily be sniped by a few immortals or hydras. However, against light air units, such as mutalisks, the Terrans now have an option to attack without using vikings. I'm not too sure about the possibility of launching nukes out of it, but it'd be like dmatrixing a ghost... and making it fly.
Although the thought of a trio of fully loaded gunships running past and shreddnig a force of zerglings is entertaining.
|
On April 08 2008 20:13 Caller wrote:
New Unit Idea:
Upgrade from Dropship (purchasable for each dropship)
Dropship
100 Minerals/100 Gas
Carrying Capacity: 8
160 HP
2 Armor
Upgrade for the Dropship:
Gunship Upgrade
Requires the dropship to "land" for a time, about 10 seconds, in order to add the extra armor/capabilities/engines. During this time it cannot move and is vulnurable to ground attack, but not air. After this time, it turns into a fully operationable gunship.
(+100 Minerals, 25 Gas)
The Gunship gains +50 HP and + 2 Armor, but it can now only carry infantry units and it's capacity is reduced to 4. However, the infantry onboard the gunship can now shoot outside of it using the firing slits. Due to the high altitude and velocity of the Gunship, all weapons range are reduced by 1 instead of increased.
Essentially, you're paying 200 minerals and 125 gas, or 3/4ths of an ultralisk, to get a 250 HP flying thing that can do about 24 damage/second at a smaller range. It's essentially a flying ultralisk, as an ultralisk's attack speed is equal to that of the marines. Not to mention the 4 marines that should be put inside, and you're looking at a 300/125 expensive unit that can easily be sniped by a few immortals or hydras. However, against light air units, such as mutalisks, the Terrans now have an option to attack without using vikings. I'm not too sure about the possibility of launching nukes out of it, but it'd be like dmatrixing a ghost... and making it fly.
Although the thought of a trio of fully loaded gunships running past and shreddnig a force of zerglings is entertaining.
I really like this. Gunship rush gogogo Would also be a counter to Immortals and their shields! And storm!
|
On April 01 2008 02:56 VIB wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2008 02:34 MultiMarine wrote:
I also would like to see a command to unselect a unit from a control group. If you have 12 marines on hotkey 1 and you want to send 3 of them out in different directions to scout.. It would be nice to be able to unselect them from hotkey 1 directly. Press 1 hotkey, then Shift + click 3 guys out of group, then Ctrl + 1? Or is it not what you mean?
I think he means that when you shift de-select them they would be removed from the "1" control group. It's faster and more convinient than how it's handled in broodwar.
There isn't much of a downside to this, since units you deselected you usually deselected for a reason (splitting and sending to another location, too damaged etc) and you wouldn't want them in the control group anyway. *shrugs*
No biggie, but could be useful.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I just realized I haven't read this thread in a long long long long long time, I'm not sure how to include it in the monthly blizzard reports either (although they do read the forum) :C I like the gunship idea.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On April 08 2008 20:13 Caller wrote:
New Unit Idea:
Upgrade from Dropship (purchasable for each dropship)
Dropship
100 Minerals/100 Gas
Carrying Capacity: 8
160 HP
2 Armor
Upgrade for the Dropship:
Gunship Upgrade
Requires the dropship to "land" for a time, about 10 seconds, in order to add the extra armor/capabilities/engines. During this time it cannot move and is vulnurable to ground attack, but not air. After this time, it turns into a fully operationable gunship.
(+100 Minerals, 25 Gas)
The Gunship gains +50 HP and + 2 Armor, but it can now only carry infantry units and it's capacity is reduced to 4. However, the infantry onboard the gunship can now shoot outside of it using the firing slits. Due to the high altitude and velocity of the Gunship, all weapons range are reduced by 1 instead of increased.
Essentially, you're paying 200 minerals and 125 gas, or 3/4ths of an ultralisk, to get a 250 HP flying thing that can do about 24 damage/second at a smaller range. It's essentially a flying ultralisk, as an ultralisk's attack speed is equal to that of the marines. Not to mention the 4 marines that should be put inside, and you're looking at a 300/125 expensive unit that can easily be sniped by a few immortals or hydras. However, against light air units, such as mutalisks, the Terrans now have an option to attack without using vikings. I'm not too sure about the possibility of launching nukes out of it, but it'd be like dmatrixing a ghost... and making it fly.
Although the thought of a trio of fully loaded gunships running past and shreddnig a force of zerglings is entertaining.
Wow.. this sounds amazing. It would have to at LEAST be second tier if not third for the balancing to work out tho.
Maybe if they keep the medivac they could make the gunship upgrade an optional shift, like muta to guardian, where the medivac loses its healing ability for the gunship ability?
|
Gunship is interesting and shouldn't be too overpowered since it semms like it would require a bit of micromanagement with marines and all. The only thing is that it's pretty close to the banshee which already is.. a gunship.
I had the similar take on terran anyway, and would like to see some assault transport functionality. So I support something along those lines.
|
Solution to the macro problem.
Inspired from the QnA batch 35 with the new mothership that lets warp gates build units directly to the mothership FASTER. This is supposed to solve the MBS uproar once and for all by introducing new macro tasks.
Idea
The basic idea is to have abilities for units/buildings that is NOT queable and NOT multishootable which improves macro rather than direct fighting ability.
Protoss:
Copy paste from QnA 35:
The Mothership now allows Protoss Gateways that have converted to Warp Gates to be able to warp units straight to the Mothership. The warp-in mechanic (which cannot be queued) has also been tweaked to allow Protoss players who use it to get a slight time decrease in unit production as opposed to queuing units traditionally at the Gateways. In other words, the cooldown timer on warp-in doesnt take as long as the build time for units at a Gateway.
So use the mothership to build things faster. Then the mothership should be fairly early in tech, or the ability should be moved to another unit. This to allow for more intense macroing at least from midgame.
Terran:
A building called "administration centre" or something similar (preferably less lame) which has an ability that can be used on unit producing building with about a siege tanks range. No mana, no cooldown. spammable, not queable. This ability will refund a percentage of the units cost (10%? 20%? has to be tuned) once on each unit WHILE IT IS BUILDING. So you will have to build this building central in yuor base, and each time you build units, you will have to select this building afterwards and go on a refunding round for optimal macro. (and you may be able to build more units after that, that you can refund!) Alternatively it can be put on one of the existing buildings (ebay? academy?).
So building placement will be even more importnat for terran, and it may not always be a good idea to proxy too agressively. Also, this building will be target for raids i guess.
Zerg:
Give one of the zerg units (overlord comes to mind, or maybe queen) an ability "create larva". This should have fairly large range and target a hatchery that will create an extra larva, up to a maximum of 3 larva. With cooldown or mana.
This is probably the coolest idea imo. Building will be 1) use all existing larvae 2) select a group of overlords close to your hatcheries 3) c-click-c-click-c-click until you have 3 larvae on all hatcheries. 4) repeat until all overlords have used their cooldown. Also, you will have to chose if you want to scout with your overlords, or macro with them, which could make for more strategic play in some way probably. Similarly, if the queen has the ability, you will have to chose if you need to mana for fighting, or for macro.
flameguard
I fled this subforum long before the supermods cleaned up here, and ive just been reading the occasional QnA. So im sorry if this idea has been proposed before, or if this is wrong place to post.
|
Cascade, I don't think you understood what they said. The mothership has been given warp aura PLUS they tweaked warp in. Those are 2 separate changes. Building motherships will not allow you to build faster. It will allow you to do the same thing you were doing since t1, but at where your mothership is at. Which you can already do with phase prisms anyway. They just added it to the mothership as well.
Terrans already have a production increasing mechanisms. Which is an addon called reactor which you can plug to any production building. Some builds ago the reactor would make that building produce twice as fast, then they changed it to just increase queues, then I don't know exactly how it works on the current build.
But if they really really really wanted to add clicks to production, I'm sure they rather just remove MBS instead. It makes zero sense to make a change, then make additional changes to "make up" for that change.
|
I admit that I found the formulation on the mothership a bit unclear. But still, the mothership makes the warp agtes build faster if you have the attention to spare right?
And the reactor isnt the same thing, because it works passively. I want things that you actually must spend clicks on.
The reason they want to keep the MBS is that it makes it more newb friendly, right? And that people find it overly complicated to "fight the UI". Unfortunately this removes the speed requirement for a perfect macro, which the more competetive players mourn.
Well, we can now get both. We keep the MBS for the newbs, and it will still feel easy to reasonably quickly build up a satisfying army. And the pros can still macro the hell out of mortals by abusing these extra speed-demanding macro possibilities.
of course the exact ideas will have to be tuned and reformulated, but i think the general idea of abilities that speeds up/partially refunds is a potential solution to the MBS problem.
|
On April 17 2008 07:38 Cascade wrote:
The reason they want to keep the MBS is that it makes it more newb friendly, right? And that people find it overly complicated to "fight the UI". Short: No. Long: This is no place and time, read some of the other 10 thousand threads about it.
|
hey, Im trying to be constructive, dont group me up with the MBS mobs please. I had an idea and I posted it in the "new ideas" thread, what is wrong?
If you know a better place to post the idea, please redirect me.
If it is not a new idea, then could you please show me where it was proposed before.
Sorry for being defensive, could we try to stay on topic now?
|
1) a list of hidden modifiers, armor types, and definitions (of concusive explosive or whatever) in the help section
2) autoclick joining: when the message that your firend has joined a game appears, the name of the game is a hyperlink, and you can clikc it to join right away
3) some form of a shield battery/ shield bubble, preferably on the nexus to spiff it up the protoss main building.
4) have the default command be "unburrow" when you click "u" while having selected a mixed group of burrowed and unburrowed units. the purpose is that when you get burrowed units discovered, it's almost impossible to tell your units en masse to unburrow and engage if you have the default command be "burrow". instead of everything unburrowing and engaging, you merely tell the ones that are getting fired at to burrow. and in your frustration your whole burrwoed army dies.
-on the other hand, it's not very hard to burrow and unburrow units in your own base, when you are not getting attacked. and they usually aren't discovered in your base if they unburrow. having unburrow as the default command for "u" when having selected a mixed group of burrowed and unburrowed units only makes sense, and i hope they implement this.
|
Hey i just had an idea for a really cool new spell:
A spell that changes the type of unit between robotic/alive.
You know, like it would give something robotic a soul, or take the soul of something living.
That would create new possibilities for uses in combination with spells that only affect one of the types.
Eh? Eh?
|
I don't think they should have automine. It seems too... unlike starcraft to take out all the multitasking.
|
This is more directed towards Samwise Didier since he's in charge of the art departement of SC2 I believe.
I wanna briefly discuss about the art of the lurker because its really the thing that strikes me the most at this point. And realistically, I think that discussions about art is more suitable since SC2 is still in alpha phase and discussing balance is kind of pointless to a certain degree.
I think that the lurker looks too much like a mix of a crab and dinosaur at this time. I was hoping it would look a little bit more spiderlike, with edgier/sharper features. The head looks similar to a triceraptops and I dont think that dinosaur looks really suit the zerg. I think lots of people brought similar remarks when the lurker was first revealed so maybe a bit of reworking on this unit would be a good thing.
I mean, the Siege tank has had its art upgraded, so I hope that our beloved zerg lurker will receive a similar amount of love.
|
I'm just gonna post to express another vote in favour of changing the dark templar art. Looks like he's gonna trip over his weapon, and the death animation is just lol
|
And here's another vote for changing the DT art!
And I just thought of a random idea to get the zerg roach healing to be balanced. Why not make it that roach's super heal require energy to use (like healing in SC1) but its only to itself and it's auto-used. So when it's finished energy there's no heal until it regens back reaal slow the energy. I mean it'll be really awesome to send in a swarm of roaches and you know they only can last like 10sec with their super heal before they gotta retreat. Makes for some interesting play eh?
|
Couple new game mechanics introduced by Blizzard has interesting side-effect concerning huge 192x192 and 256x256 maps. As you probably know this kind of maps is extremely rare except for sole fun games - long distances make aggressive style ineffective and force slow-paced, viscous, overextended and defensive play. SC2 could give potential for these maps. But is it supposed to be a good thing? Well, firstly, this will open even more doors for mapmakers and in long run that means longer life for the game. And secondly, together with "team-based start locations" feature in map-editor that could make 2v2 games more tech and macro based, and what's much more interesting, that could create such term as "competitive 3v3".
For protoss this new mechanics is Warp-Gates. Obviously, nothing can change early-game pace on such maps, but in the middle-game protoss player has got a mean to just ignore part of the map and virtually move production line closer to the opponent.
On the other hand, we have Zerg with Nydus Worm. And although developers themselves didn't yet define its concept, we can pretty much assume that Zerg will be at least on par with Protoss in terms of mobility. So three match-ups - PvP, ZvP, ZvZ - could turn out to be quite dynamic on really huge maps.
Terran, though, has nothing. And that made me think, maybe that's what we can cogitate about?
What is Terran in developers' mind? That's a race of nomads. Race, that comes, eats resources and leaves nothing behind - that's one of the reasons why Salvage ability was born. Terran can't afford abandoning buildings. They take them to pieces and fly away. "Fly" rang the bell for me and that was first premise. Second premise was old Stardock concept and even though it was scrapped, idea behind still sounds good for me. Suggestion I end up with is give Terran upgrade which:
1. Dramatically increases buildings' fly speed
2. Allows buildings to produce units in the fly mode
3. In contrast to Warp-Gates, once researched, affects all buildings immediately.
Sounds ridiculously imbalanced, probably, so you should keep in mind couple very important points:
- That should be middle-game upgrade. It shouldn't bear on early-mid game in any way and shouldn't give Terran another cheap cheese strategy
- Command Center shouldn't be affected at all
- Add-ons are unavailable when building is in the air, therefore flying building can build only basic units and only twice as slow as if it had reactor attached
- Mapmakers can control where you are able to land buildings and where not.
How does it improves the game?
I. Much better playability of large maps. Though Terran's mechanic is less effective than Protoss', it's more reliable - much easier to destroy pylon or Phase Prism than factory, and if costly Warp-Gates are attacked Protoss is in serious trouble, when Terran can try to fly away (if there is room to fly away of course).
II. Increased viability of Salvage. Outside of bunker rushing, it has very limited use right now, as salvaging Supply depots (and diminishing food count for a period of time) in order to move them in another place makes no sense since they can go underground and the safest place for them is near production buildings. Salvaging add-ons also doesn't look effective. Both of these could change with this suggestion. Besides salvage (with rebuilding later), land/liftoff and building movement are all base management abilities. Increasing their utility potentially increases time player would spend managing his base.
III. The idea isn't revolutionary nor original, yet it gives Terran's gameplay new fresh feeling. It's merely an evolution of already existent concept, just like add-ons mechanics or Nydus Worm mechanics. And that's good.
Although concept isn't final and it can take plenty of fixes (for example, reduce add-on build time if previously same add-on was salvaged), I think that's a good direction to think in.
|
|
|
From what I've heard from people who attended blizzcon, terran buildings already move quite a bit faster than the original
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
InRaged, large maps are broken not due to distances, they are broken due to minimap.
|
I was thinking about this... what about getting rid of the roach and putting the ultralisk in its place (with the current abilities it has now with probably less hps). Then be able to get an upgrade later that will let the the ultralisk egg evolve into the torrasque, that not only has the roach's healing ability (probably nerfed), but has like 8 armor like in SC1. I can just imagine the ultralisk evolving in big fucken eggs, then morphing into torrasques (like twice as big as ultras).
|
The helicopter gunship idea is the best that I've seen in this thread. Flying bunker FTW. Aside from the inherent awesomeness of having a flying bunker, if Blizzard is really fixated on the medivac dropship idea (which for the record is really bad), you can just put medics in the dropships and have them fly around dumping yellow sparks. Magical!
|
On April 18 2008 03:45 gwho wrote:
4) have the default command be "unburrow" when you click "u" while having selected a mixed group of burrowed and unburrowed units. the purpose is that when you get burrowed units discovered, it's almost impossible to tell your units en masse to unburrow and engage if you have the default command be "burrow". instead of everything unburrowing and engaging, you merely tell the ones that are getting fired at to burrow. and in your frustration your whole burrwoed army dies.
-on the other hand, it's not very hard to burrow and unburrow units in your own base, when you are not getting attacked. and they usually aren't discovered in your base if they unburrow. having unburrow as the default command for "u" when having selected a mixed group of burrowed and unburrowed units only makes sense, and i hope they implement this.
actually, what would be even better is if they added an extra button, or just make the unburrow/burrow button use 2 shortcuts. u for unburrow, and b for burrow.
didn't they say they were adding more command buttons? maybe they could spare another button for this.
seems to me since drones morph into buildings/structures, they could use a letter from the word morph. r, p, h, o, all good. m is move already. currently b is for build structure or morph building or something like that so if v is advanced then h is nearby...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On April 08 2008 20:13 Caller wrote:
New Unit Idea:
Upgrade from Dropship (purchasable for each dropship)
Dropship
100 Minerals/100 Gas
Carrying Capacity: 8
160 HP
2 Armor
Upgrade for the Dropship:
Gunship Upgrade
Requires the dropship to "land" for a time, about 10 seconds, in order to add the extra armor/capabilities/engines. During this time it cannot move and is vulnurable to ground attack, but not air. After this time, it turns into a fully operationable gunship.
(+100 Minerals, 25 Gas)
The Gunship gains +50 HP and + 2 Armor, but it can now only carry infantry units and it's capacity is reduced to 4. However, the infantry onboard the gunship can now shoot outside of it using the firing slits. Due to the high altitude and velocity of the Gunship, all weapons range are reduced by 1 instead of increased.
Essentially, you're paying 200 minerals and 125 gas, or 3/4ths of an ultralisk, to get a 250 HP flying thing that can do about 24 damage/second at a smaller range. It's essentially a flying ultralisk, as an ultralisk's attack speed is equal to that of the marines. Not to mention the 4 marines that should be put inside, and you're looking at a 300/125 expensive unit that can easily be sniped by a few immortals or hydras. However, against light air units, such as mutalisks, the Terrans now have an option to attack without using vikings. I'm not too sure about the possibility of launching nukes out of it, but it'd be like dmatrixing a ghost... and making it fly.
Although the thought of a trio of fully loaded gunships running past and shreddnig a force of zerglings is entertaining.
I love this idea and want to talk some more about it, I'll definitely make sure to include this in my monthly report to blizzard.
I talked to Waxangel on MSN about it and he brought up a very good point about it's role as a fighter, ie how good should it actually be? Is it fair for a dropship (strong harassing unit) to also be one of the terran's primary air fighters (he brought up the example of a corsair getting a drop upgrade). And if it's too weak, all it does is make it a stronger harasser (ie can kill scourge - not that they are currently in the game - , can kill small air forces). But yeah, having the capacity go down from 8 to 4 or 5 is definitely a good way to solve this.
Other things to figure out tho;
- AA only/both?
- It's role in the terran air force: support fighter? Main terran AA vs Zerg, Viking vs protoss ?
Etc, I absolutely adore this idea tho, liked it in Armies of exigo too but no idea how the balance was there.
Oh and I think I prefer the name Gunboat over Gunship.. Anyone else agree/disagree? It's obviously trivial but still :D
On March 19 2008 07:51 Famehunter wrote:
Concept: Terran reactor v 2.0 (maximizing macro play for experienced players).
Just something I was thinking about when I saw a post somewhere that mentioned that the terran building upgrade called reactors would no longer allow production of 2 units at once but rather increased the production queue (wich is completely useless if you ask me, even counter productive).
The way I was thinking the reactor could work is, it would give a boost in the unit building time but in order to do so , a SCV would have to be moved inside the reactor (make a small animation with a door that lets the SCV inside). Once the SCV enters the reactor, the production speed of the next unit from that facility is increased.
Once the unit is finished being produced, the SCV is ejected from the reactor, requiring the players attention to send it back inside another time if he wants to speed up the production for the next unit in queue. This would add an element of skill, as micromanagement of the SCV would require the players attention everytime he wants to "boost" the production of units.
This is also a nice way of optimizing macro play for experienced players and takes no advantage of the MBS feature, rather requiring the player to actually perform mechanical manoeuvres with the mouse (by sending the scv inside the reactor) in order to boost unit production.
I don't like this idea because it's 1) Very arbitrary, not having MBS is just.. easier. 2) SCVs getting hit and running away, trying to find them, scvs cluttering up your base etc.. Nah I don't want to 20 scvs sitting outside my buildings.
On March 28 2008 06:04 VIB wrote:I think there could be periodical Map contests. Blizzard staff would choose one map say every week from the community, to take part in the official ladder map list. I know thousands of people would love this
I like this idea - once a week is too often tho. Also, your replay idea is good but I think many of the top players would resent having their replays shared
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On April 17 2008 07:38 Cascade wrote:
I admit that I found the formulation on the mothership a bit unclear. But still, the mothership makes the warp agtes build faster if you have the attention to spare right?
And the reactor isnt the same thing, because it works passively. I want things that you actually must spend clicks on.
The reason they want to keep the MBS is that it makes it more newb friendly, right? And that people find it overly complicated to "fight the UI". Unfortunately this removes the speed requirement for a perfect macro, which the more competetive players mourn.
Well, we can now get both. We keep the MBS for the newbs, and it will still feel easy to reasonably quickly build up a satisfying army. And the pros can still macro the hell out of mortals by abusing these extra speed-demanding macro possibilities.
of course the exact ideas will have to be tuned and reformulated, but i think the general idea of abilities that speeds up/partially refunds is a potential solution to the MBS problem.
One problem is that building units, mbs or no mbs, is simple. These timesinks are not bad ideas, but they are (and sort of have to be by their very nature) quite convoluted.
Both MBSers and anti-MBSers want something slick and intuitive I think, although we disagree about other things. Not gonna outright say timesinks like the ones you proposed are bad, but I'm dubious as to how fun they really are to use.
As VIB said, I feel a bit like if they are going to add something as advanced as that, they might as well revert to no MBS (I wouldn't mind this xDDD).
I think VIB meant this isn't the thread to discuss MBS btw, it's the perfect thread for your first post (the one with the macro-solution ideas I mean).
EDIT: Phew, now I've finished reading this thread from start to finish..
|
Sweden33719 Posts
There's a couple of things I want to talk about and I'm not sure they deserve their own thread.. Well one of them might, but here goes: the Jackal.
I've heard very little about it but so far I'm a little disappointed. It appears to be a slow/normal speed bike that fires a lurker-esque AoE attack. Well.. what's so disappointing about this you might ask? Here's the answer:
Because that's what replaced the vulture. To me this is confusing, why would they downgrade from a hoverbike to a regular one? Why would they suddenly stop using mines? Now, I'm not saying "bring back my 75 mineral vulture!".
What I do think tho, is that they should bring the model - that is a hover bike - back. If they then remove the mines and give it boosters, I don't care, just bring it back plz The jackal, from what I've seen, looks like a vulture that's just not hovering, anyway.
Now that the game is in 3D, some more could even be made of the hover concept, ie the unit could be slightly wobbly (but not at the expense of control) and so on.
It might just be that I don't know enough about the jackal, does anyone have any real info (preferably first hand if you went to play it at the zerg release..)?
|
Yeah, I've expressed my disappointment in one of these threads after seeing the jackal. It's basically a lurker for the Terran. Also, for a bike to stop and fire flames does not sound smart. It should speed past dodging fire while attacking like interceptors. Otherwise, change it to something else. Like another robot. LOL.
|
If the jackal is slow, that would suck. That would leave Terran with no fast units, no?
Although if it were too fast it looks like it would be disgusting on harass...
Random unrelated thought:
I've always like the idea of a "carrier tower." Anyone who's played a certain LoTR game knows about one of the two towers by the black gate was a carrier. The more I thought about it the more a appealing a Protoss defensive structure that launched interceptors started sounding.
|
I have an idea for an ability for the mothership instead of the phase prism power ability, because I think that two units having the same support ability becomes redundant and less interesting, and SC is all about every unit having unique strengths and weaknesses.
However, I understand what they're trying to achieve with the Mothership as a beacon of sorts for the Protoss forces, hence the name. So I propose this alternate ability:
Fleet Matrix (Mothership Ability)
The Mothership can store other Protoss flying units (besides other Motherships, because that would be ridiculous) as energy much like a Phase Prism can transport ground units. Each flying unit takes up one slot, and the Mothership has 16 slots. While stored, these units regain shields rapidly and can be redeployed at a moment's notice.
What Makes the Ability Useful
On the surface it doesn't sound like a very useful ability, after all flying units can already cross all terrain, so what is the point? Well, this is actually a unique way to bring back one of the functions of the Arbiter, which was concealing your fleet. Unless you had a detector, you had no idea the magnitude of the Protoss fleet you were facing.
Similarly, this ability allows you to conceal this information from your enemies and be more tactful in your attacks. Instead of a massive fleet moving about the map, you have an innocuous mothership. Also, the mothership allows you to save units from focus fire while at the same time replenishing shields.
Why the Ability Fits
It perfectly suits the Protoss, who seem to move in the direction of an overwhelming force stemming from nothing (ie Warpgates.) Unlike its current phase prism aura, however, its not just a copy/paste of another unit's ability. It fits the theme of the unit, as you can easily envision a mothership unleashing swarms of fighters and ships from its hull. Basically taking the carrier to a whole new level.
Anyhow, was just an idea I thought was neat and seeing what you guys think.
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
With game play how about lets say if there's a DT in your LOS, if your opponent clicks on it, you would here a faint DT speaking sound, if your above the DT. I think that can make sense if not I'll re post with a scenario.
|
I've got one little idea for terrans.
Since terran infantry can no longer heal in the early game as the olny healing unit is available from starport, why not give bunkers small healing capability. Every organic unit in the bunker could regenerate small amount of lost hitpoints per seconds (1-4 hp/s sounds fair to me).
This way early bunker rushes become more efficient and you don't have to waste 1hp marines on the field of battle.
What do you think?
|
I like Inraged's idea; terran buildings SHOULD get a late game upgrade that allows them to produce on the fly, and move faster. Not only does this fit with the overall flavor of Terran, as pointed out, but it can be another source for macro that will make up for MBS if floating, producing buildings cannot be hotkeyed together, much like warp gates cannot be now. The lazy macroer can merely rally all his stationary buildings to the front lines, increasing his time of travel and spreading his forces, while the pro macroer can float his production along with his army; while more risky and harder to manage, it allows for instant reinforcements and the ability to follow actions easier; perhaps even building micro?
Late-game harrass also becomes a lot more fun for terran, I would think; imagine dropping a whole base into an enemy's main.
|
Seriously, I love the gunship/gunboat idea. Same with the mothership carrying ability, both just seem like solid-cool-down-to-earth ideas.
yeah! 
|
Carrying seems kinda weird; it's only useful when you have a giant air fleet... and if you have one of those, the game really should be over. I think having a cloaking field a la arbiter is just more useful all around. Although being a floating shield battery would be rather cool.
|
Hey guys, here's some random terran ideas ^^b
What do you think if the nomad/science vessel had this AoE thing (like ensnare, etc.) that would lower armor. Instead of just irradiating and running away (which is annoying for zerg), marines would be able to cope with ultralisks and other things much better, making them attack more. I'm not sure what this AoE thing would be, but I would think some chemical related thing would do.
I agree that buildings should do more when they are floating around. I suggest that each building could build stuff on the fly, but when the units are built they should just stay inside the building, and all come out when the buildings land. Only for ground units though, air units should pop out of the starport when the starport is floating regardless.
I've always thought that ghosts could look like something that could detect, so why not?
Are drop pods still in?
Why take out splash for banshees? Overpowered? Splash + cloak would've been awesome and the banshee now just looks like a stronger wraith, which imo, weren't that exciting in most situations.
Make the ground vikings a massable unit from factories (minerals only) and also air vikings at the starport. It's just an interesting idea but I would understand if it would be too weird xD.
This is kind of random but have a guy similiar to L from death note operate the nomad. That would be awesome xD.
Oh and I've always thought these things looked cool. If blizzard could somehow implement them that would be awesome, but siege tanks look like they fill the role already . They look cool though.
edit: fixed some grammar
|
What if the Jackal did aoe damage around it for every time it was ordered turned or something instead of the linear splash thingy...it would be micro intensive but it could cover the guerilla tactics that the Vulture had while still not straying to far from the formula...
|
Not sure if this is a great idea, but i feel like nomads do so little...
I was wondering if it would be a good idea to have them make spider mines?
instead of having a limited 3 spidermines, maybe they could pay 15 mins per mine and have a short build time, much like scarabs, except they dont build up a store of them
The placement would be exactly like the auto turrets, click the spider mine icon and then click on the ground, the nomad lands a builds a mine for that spot.
I don't know if the specific funtions of the spider mine should be the same, or maybe something else, like manual trigger (dont like that idea but something along those lines)
|
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played.
|
Well this Jackal or what seemz to be very... weird for me. at least its graphics . A fast moving fragile firebat sounds useful, but than what do terrans have against f.e. zealots early game? Rines are freekill for these charging bastardz.... < /idiot thoughts >
If a building can still train unitz while flying... it should be slowed down imo... and exactly shouldnt keep the units inside of it. I dont like the idea of 5 buildings breaking into my main with shitloadz of units after sniping out my anti - air... those buildingz flying quite fast, and have many hp.
I think doesnt matter if Reactor makes production faster, or double it - but this way units should be abit more expensive... or give something lategame to zerg, to double their larva production.
The fleet matrix wouldnt make sense in to many cases, but why not? After surviving some anti air the mothership could call in some warp prism, and those planes with the big guns ^^. the prisms deploy, and u can call in ur forces - or am i wrong?
|
On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played.
I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three
|
On May 07 2008 13:09 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played. I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three
for zerg magic units and special units, i can imagine one popping out per larvae, like ultralisks and defilers and what not. but really, the zerg basic units need to create the swarm feeling. 4 lings per egg and 2 hydras per egg, and 2 mutas per egg plz. really need the swarm feeling.
also, when u have a lot more swarm units, when a special unit comes along like ultra or defiler or whatever, it feels more like it's part of a swarm rather than just another unit, because it's outnumbered so much by smaller minions.
at the very least, make zerglings free. we all know that larvae is a limiting resource until endgame, and in the endgame, zerglings suck anyways, but man, having huge amounts of small minions die is just what zerg needs. free zerglings fyi, and 4 per egg! but nerf the hp and attack damage plz. also, allow zerg players to control more units per control group than toss and terran players.
|
On May 07 2008 19:49 Polyphasic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2008 13:09 arb wrote:On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played. I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three for zerg magic units and special units, i can imagine one popping out per larvae, like ultralisks and defilers and what not. but really, the zerg basic units need to create the swarm feeling. 4 lings per egg and 2 hydras per egg, and 2 mutas per egg plz. really need the swarm feeling. also, when u have a lot more swarm units, when a special unit comes along like ultra or defiler or whatever, it feels more like it's part of a swarm rather than just another unit, because it's outnumbered so much by smaller minions. at the very least, make zerglings free. we all know that larvae is a limiting resource until endgame, and in the endgame, zerglings suck anyways, but man, having huge amounts of small minions die is just what zerg needs. free zerglings fyi, and 4 per egg! but nerf the hp and attack damage plz. also, allow zerg players to control more units per control group than toss and terran players.
the feel of the swarm shouldn't be over powered. You're basically asking for a free 3 pool. Zerglings are really, really good, and even if they're slightly nerfed they can still rape large forces, and especially with all these new zerg units and such and the lack of terran medics. You saw that video where like 100 lings annihlated some poor Terran outpost. Free units are just a bad idea.
If you want zerglings to be free, then marines and zealots better be free too.
|
I know that for the original port of sc2 they dont have a fourth race. But what if they added a fourth race in an expansion pack?
|
I think terran supply depots should be upgradable. It's annoying playing terran on a map with very limited space to build on. You would save so much space if you didn't have to build so many supply depots but could instead upgrade them for more supply.
I think the supply should be upgraded but the hp should always remain the same. So you could go for only ONE supply depot the entire game but if someone destroyed it you would be totally fucked going down to 0 supply in an instance. Deciding how many supply's to build and how many to upgrade becomes a strategic decision.
|
10387 Posts
On May 07 2008 19:49 Polyphasic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2008 13:09 arb wrote:On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played. I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three for zerg magic units and special units, i can imagine one popping out per larvae, like ultralisks and defilers and what not. but really, the zerg basic units need to create the swarm feeling. 4 lings per egg and 2 hydras per egg, and 2 mutas per egg plz. really need the swarm feeling. also, when u have a lot more swarm units, when a special unit comes along like ultra or defiler or whatever, it feels more like it's part of a swarm rather than just another unit, because it's outnumbered so much by smaller minions. at the very least, make zerglings free. we all know that larvae is a limiting resource until endgame, and in the endgame, zerglings suck anyways, but man, having huge amounts of small minions die is just what zerg needs. free zerglings fyi, and 4 per egg! but nerf the hp and attack damage plz. also, allow zerg players to control more units per control group than toss and terran players.
You don't know what you're talking about. What you suggest would make the zerg race so horribly imbalanced that SC2 becomes just another imba rts out there. Zerglings, are in fact, highly useful. Have you even looked at any of the modern strats?
|
Here's an idea:
One thing that I hate about casting spells is that when I am trying to use an area spell in a specific area such as disruption web, plague, or storm, I sometimes click on an enemy unit and it places the spell in the wrong location. Maybe in SC2 we can hold a certain button to avoid targeting a unit while casting spells (Or maybe I'm just a major noob and know of no way to do this. If so please tell me how, thanks).
So here's how it would work. I see 6 ultras coming in to kill my 6 goons and 2 corsairs. I immediately back into a corner and hold control to make perfect webs around the goons. They pick off the ultras because I don't mis-click on an ultra and web my own units. It's so simple yet so powerful.
|
On May 10 2008 11:30 boredcouch wrote:
Here's an idea:
One thing that I hate about casting spells is that when I am trying to use an area spell in a specific area such as disruption web, plague, or storm, I sometimes click on an enemy unit and it places the spell in the wrong location. Maybe in SC2 we can hold a certain button to avoid targeting a unit while casting spells (Or maybe I'm just a major noob and know of no way to do this. If so please tell me how, thanks).
So here's how it would work. I see 6 ultras coming in to kill my 6 goons and 2 corsairs. I immediately back into a corner and hold control to make perfect webs around the goons. They pick off the ultras because I don't mis-click on an ultra and web my own units. It's so simple yet so powerful.
this is a nice idea
|
with unlimited selection, armys can be controlled much more easily than before
to make games more exciting increase the pop cap? i think watching 300/300 armies clash would be much more intense than 200/200 and so on.
|
On May 07 2008 19:49 Polyphasic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2008 13:09 arb wrote:On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played. I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three for zerg magic units and special units, i can imagine one popping out per larvae, like ultralisks and defilers and what not. but really, the zerg basic units need to create the swarm feeling. 4 lings per egg and 2 hydras per egg, and 2 mutas per egg plz. really need the swarm feeling. also, when u have a lot more swarm units, when a special unit comes along like ultra or defiler or whatever, it feels more like it's part of a swarm rather than just another unit, because it's outnumbered so much by smaller minions. at the very least, make zerglings free. we all know that larvae is a limiting resource until endgame, and in the endgame, zerglings suck anyways, but man, having huge amounts of small minions die is just what zerg needs. free zerglings fyi, and 4 per egg! but nerf the hp and attack damage plz. also, allow zerg players to control more units per control group than toss and terran players.
Even in the SC:BW, cracklings are awesome... maybe the 90% of em dies till they get cloze, but when they get cloze that means the end of the game.
The free zergling stuff isnt viable because of early and midgame... even if that could make interesting stuff and could be balanced in late game.
I like the swarm feeling, but i dont like the idea about shitloadz of freekilled units... exactly not. Would be harder to balance aswelll...
|
I dunno if this has been mentioned before, but i think they should scratch the banshee for terrans. I've been thinking this ever since SC first came out, but if their like a couple centuries in the future, shouldn't they have invented BOMBERS? So give terrans a ATG bomber that say, u have to micro like vults to drop bombs. Bombs can be purchased for say, 5 mins and do 15-30ish splash dmg. Combine with a cooldown timer to drop bombs, and you got a great counter for lings, roaches, zeals, and other small massed infantry.
|
United States7166 Posts
On May 10 2008 11:30 boredcouch wrote:
Here's an idea:
One thing that I hate about casting spells is that when I am trying to use an area spell in a specific area such as disruption web, plague, or storm, I sometimes click on an enemy unit and it places the spell in the wrong location. Maybe in SC2 we can hold a certain button to avoid targeting a unit while casting spells (Or maybe I'm just a major noob and know of no way to do this. If so please tell me how, thanks).
So here's how it would work. I see 6 ultras coming in to kill my 6 goons and 2 corsairs. I immediately back into a corner and hold control to make perfect webs around the goons. They pick off the ultras because I don't mis-click on an ultra and web my own units. It's so simple yet so powerful.
yeah perhaps right clicking rather than left clicking should make it so it only targets terrain and not units/buildings.
this is a great idea btw, I really hate it when this happens in SC1
|
Caller: That gunship idea is pretty badass.
I thought it'd be cool if the Terrans had an electronic warfare unit to act as support. It probably shouldn't have weapons. Some abilities might include:
Radar Jamming - An active effect (casting cost + energy degen) that masks friendly units' minimap signature within a certain radius around the unit. Masked units can still be attacked by enemies within range, but this spell allows you to truly hide your troop movements instead of praying you don't get intercepted. Depending on how effective this ability is, detection may or may not be able to counteract it. Not sure how it would affect Zerg.
Targeting Hub - A ranged AoE spell (casting cost + energy degen) that lets surrounding units share targeting data. Any missiles fired at the area of casting can target both air and ground; I originally intended this idea for a killer Valk combo (the casting cost would have to be pretty high to balance it), but from the units we've seen so far, it could still work. To stop the rain of death =), the opponent has to destroy the caster, which could be immobile while the ability is active.
Decoy - A remote-detonated device that deals no damage, but causes an enemy's "We're Under Attack" signal to sound if detonated near an enemy unit/building. While they press SPACEBAR, you can move your units in at another location to perform whatever tasks you have in mind. =) Each caster might be limited to one, and it could expire after a certain amount of time has passed.
Hack Turret - This one comes courtesy of System Shock 2. Like the Targeting Hub ability, the unit could be immobile while this spell is active. This one could really do a number on static D placed in mineral fields. It shouldn't work on Zerg or bunkers, though.
I'm thinking the unit would have to be a ground unit with average speed depending on balancing. Haven't thought of a name, but it would definitely be a trickster figure from mythology. If used effectively, you could get your opponent to punch his/her monitor. =)
|
I would like to see a much improved observer mode. This would help the e-sport nature of the game, since it can be more exciting to watch.
One thing that has been mentioned already is the ability to zoom out for observers, which is a good idea.
My suggestion would be a complete different UI for observer mode, that takes up less space on the screen, to make more of the game visible, and only concentrates on the key features it needs:
-Resource/supply counters for the players
-Toggable statistic windows during the game, like a unit table showing the numbers for each unit type a player has, a little window showing the current research status etc.
-Dramatic health numbers, when a building has very few hp left, the game will show a red number above it (drop targeting a hatchery), showing its health points. This might need a clever algorithm for to when show those numbers and when not, because otherwise it could be annoying.
-Research/train bars over buildings, showing the current research/unit beeing researched/built in that building with its progress.
|
Decoy - A remote-detonated device that deals no damage, but causes an enemy's "We're Under Attack" signal to sound if detonated near an enemy unit/building. While they press SPACEBAR, you can move your units in at another location to perform whatever tasks you have in mind. =) Each caster might be limited to one, and it could expire after a certain amount of time has passed.
love this idea
|
On May 14 2008 20:55 Krzycho wrote:
Decoy - A remote-detonated device that deals no damage, but causes an enemy's "We're Under Attack" signal to sound if detonated near an enemy unit/building. While they press SPACEBAR, you can move your units in at another location to perform whatever tasks you have in mind. =) Each caster might be limited to one, and it could expire after a certain amount of time has passed.
love this idea
To many bad ideas get to much attention here..... How about you just attack that building with one marine instead? Instead of wasting alot of resources to tech to that spellcaster i mean.
Very bad idea...
ALOT of bad ideas here!.....
|
Suppose you could spam decoys several times with a thirty-second break in between each one... those marines are going to add up to a few hundred minerals. Besides, a Terran parasite that can self-destruct wouldn't be so bad, would it? What you get with the spellcaster isn't so much that you can surprise-attack; because you're right--you can send one marine to divert attention. What you pay for by teching to it is another way to make your opponent's information less reliable. It's like building sensor towers at unclaimed expansions. How important disinformation is late-game, I'm not sure; it just sounds fun to me.
And you bring up a good point; it doesn't even have to be a separate unit. What if Ghosts could use the decoy? (Not that it would be any better--they already have snipe.) Another issue is, decoys and radar jamming would have no effect in a game against the AI.
Here's another idea, derived from some of the more interesting spells in the game's tendency to toggle unit data states instead of merely dealing damage (e.g. dark swarm): the Zerg "phlegm wad," which covers units in a protective coating that absorbs splash damage, but due to its viscosity, unit movement is slowed. It's ensnare with a twist.
It wouldn't balance well with swarm, since lurkers would be invincible (maybe burrowing removes it?). And there could be a negative side effect related to phlegmed units taking more damage, or else psi storm would be too greatly affected. Maybe units take full damage regardless of armor type, or take building damage in addition to regular damage?
Another poster mentioned a spell idea for changing robotic units to organic, or whatever unit flag... Regardless of particular examples, I think having these types of spells, which can be used offensively or defensively depending on the situation, adds a layer of complexity to in-game decision-making.
|
Well... if you can spam decoys it would be extremly annoying and people would demand a way to turn of the - you are under attack - warning.... cause they would have no use for it at all.
|
Decoy seems pretty useless, doesn't hallucination already produce the same effect? Hallucinate a unit and have it attack the enemy somewhere.
|
Yes, I think if you took decoy to its logical conclusion, then you'd end up with hallucination; only it's fake damage without the fake unit. There doesn't seem to be a way to make it useful enough to justify its own spell without copying hallucination. =\
On May 16 2008 03:00 MultiMarine wrote:
Well... if you can spam decoys it would be extremly annoying and people would demand a way to turn of the - you are under attack - warning.... cause they would have no use for it at all.
I doubt it would be implemented it to the degree you're suggesting, but it's hard to know without testing it. As I posted it, decoy just wouldn't work with SC2, I suppose.
This raises another question about Blizzard's approach--how much of the data in the UI is off-limits to manipulation by players? For instance, in Advance Wars: Dual Strike, there is a C.O. whose passive ability is to hide her units' HP status. It was a major tactical edge in some cases.
If there were a way to hide the HP of your units in SC, it wouldn't be that much of an edge, since the visual cue for focus-fire is the target dying; but it would help prevent weakened units from getting picked off first. It just depends on whether the ability to see a unit's HP should be taken for granted or not.
On May 14 2008 18:12 h3r1n6 wrote:
I would like to see a much improved observer mode. This would help the e-sport nature of the game, since it can be more exciting to watch.
I like these ideas. I wonder if builds/kills by unit type could also be somehow embedded into replays? It might make replay files a lot bigger, but it would be a great way for players to track their stats. For the overhead number display, they could be toggled individually between health, kills, etc. with different conditions: Always On, Always Off, Selected, In Battle.
|
This is a suggestion for the SC2 spectator mode. In SCBW its sometimes difficult for a spectator to differentiate who is who in team games. Making the enjoyment of watching pro gamer team games a bit annoying sometimes. Some color schemes tend to confuse the viewer as to who is allied with who.
My suggestion is to have a toggle for the spectator to be able to view allied players under a similar color scheme. For example: instead of having players from team A in yellow and blue and players from team B in brown and purple, the allied color scheme could be toggled into blue and light blue for team A and red + dark red for players in team B. That would be quite a relief for me , trying to pick up just whos zerglings am I looking at when watching pro team replays on youtube
And while we re at it, why not make this a default setting for team games. It would always be the blue team vs the red team. Each player would just have a different tone of color since its still important to be able to differentiate units of each players in the same team.
|
Hmm I has another idea involving the terran thor
the terrans, without firebats, lack a viable counter to swarm/ling, as marauders, marines, ghosts, tanks, vikings, air units, etc. can't do shit vs. swarm. Sure you have Cobras, but if they're going to be so close ranged they'll get raped by lurks and lings anyways and won't be able to be healed.
I suggest that the thor's new purpose is not one of sieging up to take out an enemy position, but rather one of pushing the enemy back.
Therefore, I offer the Thor one of Three Different Modifications:
Behind Thor number 1 (pun not intended) This would be the vanilla thor, the one that is produced by the scvs.
Thor:
As a Thor, it isn't armed very well: however, it mounts some sort of modified fusion cutter that is able to do melee splash damage. I envision it as walking in front and going head-to-head against Ultralisks and Collossuses while marines shoot from behind. It would also be a rather humerous counter to dark swarm as without irradiate there's no way to kill swarm/lurk.
Upgrading a Thor
The Thor stops operating and kind of chills there, like an unfinished terran building. It can "cancel" the upgrade and revert back to its normal self but it will take a few seconds to do so. Anyways, an scv has to come and perform the necessary upgrades, so its like a continuation of the scv --> thor thing.
Thor number 2:
The Flak Thor (think of a better name, maybe Odin?)
Once completed, the flak thor no longer has a melee attack, but now it has twin flak cannons. Remember the flak cannon from UT? The thor now does cone-based splash damage for a range of 2 to both ground and air units. In other words, it's a really, really expensive firebat that also attacks air units and has 700 HP. Of course, it'd do small amounts of damage like the firebat, rendering it useless against armored units but allowing it to rape things like banelings and mutalisks and zealots. Of course, things like stalkers can just walk away and shoot it, or even hydras, so it'd be kind of useless against those kinds of units. But at least we get our firebat back in a weird way.
Thor #3
The Mine Thor
I hear all these ideas about giving Nomads spider mines. Psh. Those aren't very Terranesque, those are Warcraftesque. I suggest a more military based way of planting mines, i.e. using artillery.
The Mine Thor is like a Terran Swarm Guardian, except that instead of making broodlings it shoots spider mines at a targeted point. The mines will act like landing terran buildings, in the sense that until they take a few seconds to land (acting as an air unit) until they do land (acting as a ground unit). Once on the ground, they will then have the spider mine action of staying above ground (and targetable for a few moments) until they pop underground. You can probably give them some sort of attack, kind of like the arbiter, just to make them seem more interesting. Nomads just don't seem like the mine type to me.
These are just random ideas I have to give the Thor a home ^_^
|
<poorly disguised bump>
I have another idea for the Terran Nomad. One of the things that is really annoying for Terran pushes is how your scvs that you use to build turrets die too quickly to splash, and then you have to rally new scvs allll the way from your command centers. Wouldn't it be nicer to have a sort of "temporary" scv, like a repair drone, that can have a cost (25 mins) like the gun turrets, and a timed life like the gun turrets, except they can fix units and build things like missile turrets? I dunno about you, but I think that those little drones would be instrumental in helping a push. And they're quite terranesque too, with doing things on the field and maintaining a strong defensive posture. Plus it gives a new "counter" to storm: whereas you first used EMP against templar, now you just fix the damaged units with repair drones that are quickly replacable. I also suppose you could probably spam them and make a drone wall to block off zeals, kind of like with medics, but that would be a bit tough.
|
<another poorly disguised bump>
Use SCVs to build upgrades on units in general, so like the Gunship, you need to have an SCV nearby, the thors, etc, just b/c i don't think its very particular to have a unit upgrade itself without it being zerg.
|
I dunno if this was already suggested and I really dont want to read all the posts lol.
But what about like a reverse lurker sorta thing. It can only move while burrowed and only attack when umburrowed. It could be a melee unit that comes up and hits everything 360 degrees around it or a ranged unit that does some sort of Splash damage.
Some other variants I though of would be its a suicide unit, exploding once unburrowed. Or the melee variant the upon unburrowing it automaticaly casts ensare. Slowing units and making them easier for it to burrow and hunt them down.
Just some ideas I though of. Dunno if other people have mention these before. If someone has sorry for stealing your idea lol
|
for the immortal, it sucks if they just take almost no damage vs large explosive damage like from tanks. instead, they should be a unit that has a special ability called the energy shield which is similar to the huge energy shield from clone wars which is a skill that sets down on the ground and blocks all incoming large projectiles in one direction but not in another direction, and also, all small projectiles can still get through in either ways.
this opens up awesome ideas for strategies such as dropping in immortals to set up some shields next to the scv line, and putting in a reaver behind the shields to kill scvs. also, it opens up possibilities for terran to flank the toss with artillery to get around the shields. emp will wipe out the shield of course. emp is the hard counter against shield. the other is retreating.
also, just the general concept of an immortal that is just immortal is dumb. it should be a spell, not a stat. this isn't warcraft3 where you just arbitrarily set some units to take different damage cause they have "fortified armor". in short: a defense matrix-like spell that sets up on the ground, and blocks all large projectiles going in one direction.
also kind of like the energy shield in halo3 that you can set down on the ground that blocks incoming fire, and u can hide behind them.
|
On May 11 2008 20:02 DeifyME wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2008 19:49 Polyphasic wrote:On May 07 2008 13:09 arb wrote:On May 06 2008 18:46 Polyphasic wrote:
dunno about you guys, but zerg really needs to have big armies. that's the feeling of the zerg. instead of 2 zerglings per egg, i'd like 4, and instead of 1 hydra per egg, i'd like 2. everything should come in pairs of 2 or 4.
unit selection should be uncapped for zerg so a zerg player can select more per control group than a protoss or a terran can, reflecting the difference in playing style.
zerg units should also have hp and damage reduced to compensate for having more numbers. that is just how zerg should be played. I can hear the others screaming as 6 ultralisks pop out of 3 larvae instead of three for zerg magic units and special units, i can imagine one popping out per larvae, like ultralisks and defilers and what not. but really, the zerg basic units need to create the swarm feeling. 4 lings per egg and 2 hydras per egg, and 2 mutas per egg plz. really need the swarm feeling. also, when u have a lot more swarm units, when a special unit comes along like ultra or defiler or whatever, it feels more like it's part of a swarm rather than just another unit, because it's outnumbered so much by smaller minions. at the very least, make zerglings free. we all know that larvae is a limiting resource until endgame, and in the endgame, zerglings suck anyways, but man, having huge amounts of small minions die is just what zerg needs. free zerglings fyi, and 4 per egg! but nerf the hp and attack damage plz. also, allow zerg players to control more units per control group than toss and terran players. Even in the SC:BW, cracklings are awesome... maybe the 90% of em dies till they get cloze, but when they get cloze that means the end of the game. The free zergling stuff isnt viable because of early and midgame... even if that could make interesting stuff and could be balanced in late game. I like the swarm feeling, but i dont like the idea about shitloadz of freekilled units... exactly not. Would be harder to balance aswelll...
I am proposing that zerglings be nerfed down to 2 damage, 45 hitpoints per ling, and 6 per egg. they literally will not do much, but their main purpose will be to take hits while the zerg gets their other units within range like lurkers, explosionling things, hydras, or ultras. the swarm needs to have a swarm.... and i'm not talking about the defiler ability.
and don't tell me i don't play zerg, because i do. when lings do 2 damage, and when you have them attacking a control group of zealots, you can only get what, like 15 lings attacking at a time? while the rest are just swarming around in the back right? that is what zerg needs to be. more swarming.
in end game, when you have your blob of zealots and archons, or your blob of MM, even if you get surrounded by zerglings, you can only have something like 2 lings attacking each of your units because of the limited surface area of your blob. your blob will also murder lings like crazy... but until they can kill all the lings, they wont be able to move much.
"i see your blob, and i raise with 50 lings" ... [50 lings stalls blob for 30 seconds while 5 hydras snipe 2 templar] "i will wait for your next move to decide if i will raise your blob with 100 lings"
|
What if the carrier has other guns or cannon on their ship because they cannot handle a battlecruiser 1v1?
What if the tanks have machinegun as added defense against melee units and they should be more expensive because in SC1 if they are in mass they are simply unstoppable.
What if the medivac dropship have its own gun or cannon for its defence?
|
On May 20 2008 15:22 dat[fury] wrote:
What if the carrier has other guns or cannon on their ship because they cannot handle a battlecruiser 1v1?
What if the tanks have machinegun as added defense against melee units and they should be more expensive because in SC1 if they are in mass they are simply unstoppable.
What if the medivac dropship have its own gun or cannon for its defence?
That's why Marines and Warp Rays are in game. Just use different units = game is more fun not imba
Tanks unstoppable? Use air units counter opponent with better mix of units
|
I just thought of this while sitting on ICCUP channel (I can't cr8 games) btw someone could already post this:
being able to to check player stats and whisper to him by right-clicking on his nick on chat window (when he writes something), instead of typing his nick or looking for him among all other guys on the channel
|
Zerg shouldn't have a population limit.
different races could have different screens based on the way they are played. terran for example can be more micro intensive, so their screen size is normal.
zerg can be very very macro oriented, so their screen size is slightly larger, they have unlimited selection, and they don't have population limit.
|
On May 26 2008 08:41 Polyphasic wrote:
Zerg shouldn't have a population limit.
different races could have different screens based on the way they are played. terran for example can be more micro intensive, so their screen size is normal.
zerg can be very very macro oriented, so their screen size is slightly larger, they have unlimited selection, and they don't have population limit.
im not sure this is satire or serious
|
Im not sure if this was mentioned or not (or fixed in WC3), but it would be cool if the critters had their own distinctive colour on the minimap (Im just watching Draco vs Nony and Draco's units are blue on the minimap, just like the critters - Nony killed a Kakaru).
|
I wonder if they could implement some kind of adaptive "mimic" AI after the game comes out. For example, after some progamers have had some time with it, Bisu, Boxer, NaDa, Savior etc. Blizz could program the AI (in a patch or something) to "mimic" the playstyles of some of them (prolly would have to pay them). Then you could load up a game and "feel like" (sorta) that your playing NaDa, etc. or perhaps they could have a one sided AI load, eg. after a progame the action/timing lists of all the players are converted into AI, so if you see someone''s build on TV and want to test your mettle against it, then you can. Setable by player? Random? still up in the air.
|
i just came up with an interesting idea (to me)
what if there was like an air version of the siege tank. ofc it wouldn't have as much health, armor, attack or range, but it would still be air. it also couldn't attack unless it was in it's siege mode, and it cannot attack air.
so it would be this little flying thing that cannot attack, but when you go into "siege mode" with it, it has decent range (maybe 3/4 that of a siege tank in siege), and it cannot attack air. for stats maybe like 100 health, 50 explosive damage. (values relative to bw) it also has a similar dead zone to that of a siege tank, but maybe a little smaller. you could send a bunch of them to strategic positions without having to use a dropship for normal tanks (only carrying 2 :[ ).
|
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet. But it's something is slightly implemented on Wc3. I'm sure it will be in Sc2 as well. But I'm just going to mention it, just in case...
This for the UI.
In Wc3, when you have a mix of units together. The higher Tier units take priority for there spells to appear on the command box. This doesn't happen On Sc, example; If you have 1 Ht, and 3 zealots in a single group. You can't cast storm with the HT, unless you select it.
I'm really sure this is already implemented into Sc2.
Also make sure you reverse how burrow works, when unburrowed units are mixed in with the burrowed units... The burrowed units unburrow instead of burrowing the unburrowed units. That is just something that annoys the hell out of me when it comes to Sc1. Ruined so many early games for me.
|
New idea: Remove the Thor, the mothership, medivac, and bring back medic. Don't ruin StarCraft.
|
In SC1, Protoss and Terran ground units always spawned at the bottom end of Gateway/Barracks, etc... Units spawning here could lead them to get stuck within their own base. Since units always spawned at the southern side of Barracks/Gateways, it really cut back on some building placement ideas.
Well what if, when units are created, they spawn in the direction in which the building's rally point is. This would mean, if you had a rally point to the north of your Gateway, your Immortal would spawn on the north side of your Gateway. This way, you could set up more strategic base setups, without the fear of trapping your own units.0
|
Thor should be anti-air artillary (Siege Tank of the Sky).
It should be built as a building, but can't move unless lifted off, sort of like that star base which was scrapped..(sadly.) However, when attacking, it must be on the ground.
So....
Normal Mode = flying base
Siege(?) Mode = immobile ground unit with aerial splash attack!
I don't understand why some people hate the thor..
I think it's just awesome.
|
The Overlord should have an upgrade where it can be an object to the ground. (A stationary object) Creating a wall so you can micro away from the zerg. Also it would help protect against those corsairs / wraith harassments.
Those tenticle hanging things would just burrow it self into the ground. Its Perfect!
|
I've seen some videos, and the gameplay looks a bit too fast. What I mean by "too fast" is that the speed of the units, coupled with their fast attacks and better AI makes micro a lot harder to time. Maybe this will be resolved after getting a feel by playing the game, but based on observations, I think micro will be nearly obsolete in SC2 as it is.
Another thing, I know a lot of things in SC2 are meant to be visually pleasing as well as functional, but why do most things look rounded, like a child's toy? (Especially cannons.) My friend and I agree that a lot of Terran metal look like Tonka Trucks. For as much violence as the game will include, I don't think a childish look is the way to go.
Also, is it just me, or does SC2 look exactly like WC3 in regards to the grass and general landscape?
|
Okay since this thread is full of them I'm just going to fill it with bad ideas and units that I've randomly thought up.
I think there should be a "shield bomb" somewhere; heals everything in range to full shield and gives them a temporary +40 shield or something. Cast at range or radiates from unit, either. Or maybe you could have certain or all protoss buildings expend their shield in order to do the same (with perhaps smaller effect.) Half of this is only because the phrase "he overshields his dragoons and sends them in" sounds so awesome.
I think the Thor should be like a landborne Valkyrie that can hit both air and ground with its missiles. Missile missile missile missile missile missile missile missile * stands around *. It's still able to blow up bulidings with ease because all the missiles will land somewhere on the building (if it's not too small) but against an army the missiles will fall haphazardly, maybe hitting ultralisks or colossi with more than one missile while missing some zerglings entirely. I think it seems very terran to have a unit that can just spray and pray missiles over a third of the battlefield.
I still like the idea of the toss ability to warp spacetime and I think there should be more plays with it. Examples -
I also think the construction of Warp Gates would be hilarious; not the current warpgates that allow you to warp units everywhere, but like the Starcraft I Warp Gate that allows units of any player to warp through them. Sure, you can have your army everywhere at once... but so will the opponent, if you don't destroy them in time.
I also like the idea of "temporary recall" - send your units somewhere, but after fifteen seconds they'll go home again. They can look blue and ghostly, like stretching spacetime enough for the units to temporarily look like they're somewhere else, but eventually it will snap back.
I actually like these ideas, so feedback would be appreciated.
[[EDIT]] I suppose I should comment on things from other people if I want people to look at mine. Random thoughts:
The thing about a bomber unit is will be completely useless against AA units or they will be completely ridiculous against units that don't have AA - choose one; I don't think it's a great idea. I don't really like messing with the UI. The concept of upgrading the Thor with SCVs seems terran enough, but I think any modifications should be at least conceptually minor (plus I think mine is better.) Things I do like on the last page are the concept of directional shielding; if it doesn't make it in full, maybe even just making the Immortal's current shield directional (maybe to 180 degrees, so if you set up some ridiculous tank flank you can reap the rewards)
And as a last side note I think banelings should have an acid spore effect, so even if you only get one of them off they're not all useless (and so you don't have to get them en masse to be useful at all.)
|
Small request. When playing as Protoss, holding shift while constructing a structure should allow you to continue placing the same structure without having to hit "B C" again (for instance)
So basically "B C shift + click, shift + click . . ." continue until you don't want more cannons
|
I think the Thor should be giant SCV (seriously) with better utility skills, like grabbing a whole patch of minerals to drop in your base so your normal SCVs can keep gathering, and sniffing in a bunch of gas to fill one in your base. I think it fits with the style of the Terrans - that's basically the same strat we use in the middle east today.
Also, it could have an upgrade to produce some units on the front lines for you (more expensive/slower build times to balance it). Zerg and Protoss seem to have cool new ways to transport their units, but what about Terrans?
I admit I'm not very good at this game, so sorry if this is a terrible idea.
|
@GeneralStan: I think it is considered an issue with "skill" or "macro/micro". But that feat was in Warcraft III, yes?
|
I said this on another thread (forgot which and too lazy to check) but I think if they want to keep the medivac, they should make it Viking-esque. I was hoping people of the internet could fine tune this idea.
|
The Thors as the new terran meat shield should have an ability to actually redirect damage to them. Something like Grounding Reactor that when activated will redirect ranged attacks against nearby friendly units to the Thor. To balance this, put it on a seperate cooldown from its auto repair ability (which it already has.)
If this was confusing, here's a scenario. Thor activates Grounding Reactor, it lasts something like 6 seconds. During the 6 seconds, if say a laser or a missile is fired at a marine near the Thor, the projectile will be redirected to the Thor. Now, I don't know how lore wise that would be incorporated, something to do with gravity I imagine. But would add a little micro to these cumbersome, slow units and some more dynamic strategy to them as well.
|
NEW IDEA
Some Unit Can take This (I dunno which one) but it should be Terran
It's the Newly Revamped
DEFENSIVE MATRIX
Lets say you give it to a medic.
The medic gets 1 (one) defensive matrix emitter. What happens is its like a spider mine, except that a) they only get one per medic, and b) they act as a defense. It's like... a temporary portable bunker, except that it applies to more than just infantry.
Here's a Diagram:
M = Marine
C = Medic
E = Emitter
MMM
MCEM
MMM
in a small radius, the defensive matrix acts like a bunker. When a projectile or an attack tries to hit one of the units inside the matrix, but the source is outside. However, if a unit INSIDE the matrix, like a zergling, is attacking, the D-matrix won't affect its attacks.
Like this:
| MMM |
| MCEM |
| MMM |
This could work with siege tanks, jackals, w/e. it only lasts for 260 pts worth of damage, though, and splash damage is accounted for as if the units inside were in a bunker.
The only disadvantage is that it has a timed life (of 20 seconds) and it can also be targeted if a unit enters the defense matrix. (20 HP)
It is nonmobile, so it could be plopped down when the Terran gets flanked. After that, though, you're out of luck.
|
I like the defensive matrix idea (assuming it's not imba) but I think it should be high tech, don't give it to a basic unit like the medic (which is gone anyway). Maybe give it to the battlecruiser?
|
bumpity bump
why would you give it to the bc
its a battleship not a support vessel
maybe the nombad
|
I should have read this before I posted in the Thor discussion, sorry.
Anyway - I'd give something like this to Thor (high tech enough I think) as a usable ability - and allow him to take the extended D-matrix with him as a mobile bunker or a moving dark swarm. But I think it would be either too imba, or (if reduced in duration/capacity/radius) pointless to have it like this, my idea was that the units shouldn't be able to shoot from the inside either - not even friendly units.
edit(2x)::
Hilarious idea that goes with this - make the active D-matrix collapse violently upon Thor's destruction, destroying everything within - it would open a path for a strategy of offensive D-matrix contain and others I haven't thought of yet..
|
I have an idea for MBS. The problem with multiple buildings in sc1 was u had to actually go back to the building screen to construct them. So every time you sacrifice micro for macro. So why not have the ability to selects multiple buildings, but each acts as their own subgroup. So instead of going 5z6d for making, say 6 zeals and 4 dragoons, you must go 5ztabztabz and so on. This would allow you to watch your armies at the same time while still benefitting the faster player. It would also give one greater control over creation of units as you don't have to remap hotkeys to incorporate, say high temps into your build.
As another idea make it so if you press delete, your camera will follow a unit while still allowing you to cycle hotkeys of other units or buildings. We all know how annoying it is to have spam 9 to watch your scout
|
"The problem with multiple buildings in sc1 was u had to actually go back to the building screen to construct them."
This is exactly what anti-MBS people want. Decisions, multi-tasking, attention management, rhythm...
|
I was thinking since many people were disappointed by the removal of drop pods that via upgrade you could grant it to the dropship.
The dropship could "shoot" the pod a limited distance away and itd unfold and allow units to deploy and attack (something sort of like escape pods). It'd force the player to fly a dropship as opposed to a cloaked ghost making it less stealthy while still satisfying the awesome sight of several pods dropping in and unloading. It could either be built per dropship (landing or in air to make it more 'realistic') restricting how often players could "spam" pods. Or even have the upgrade similiar to spider mines where the dropship gets 3 pods to load infantry into.
It'd allow the infantry to eliminate AA allowing medivac to safely enter fighting zone creating a buffer.
Pro's
----
-It could be used to keep dropship's at a safer distance.
-Eliminating the slower 1x1 unload rate although balanced by time spent pod deploying or opening up as well as dropping from ship. (though it'd still be possible to normal drop if desired)
-Allow Terran to "keep" up with the faster/bigger unit deployment.
Con's
----
-Risk having pods destroyed in transit
-Not as flexible in deciding which units unload faster (unable to micro units in and out once launched)
-Limited Use
A comical silly idea I had
---
"Not so dark swarm" - Exact opposite of dark swarm, only ranged units can fire within the field and melee units are deemed useless. No idea how this would even fit lore wise or logically, but still cute nonetheless :D. Probably be given to Terran since I bet they hate defilers a WHOLE lot. (Lol i'd love to see Z players franctically trying to retreat out of a 'swarm' for once)
Since Blizzard added Mothership due to the protoss warship destroying terran ship in the original sc cinematic, how about adding the open top missile launcher unit seen in the Following Cinematic. I know perhaps adding this would be too many 'mech' units but seeing as how viking are air/ground and would most likely primarily be used for AA and quickie "get in/get out" raids.
As far as uses, perhaps restricting it to mobile aa to combat strong toss air, dealing with corruptors more efficiently (infested dropship = T_T). I think this could fill in nicely for terrans mediocre AA power.
|
Alright heres my idea.
Scrap the Thor. Its like the retard at Blizzard came up with the concept, and everyone felt sorry for him and let him have his Thor.
Instead...
Bring back the Cobra, but make it GtA. It would shoot in an AOE like the Thor, with less life, but could move while shooting. It has 5 range vs. ground. Zealots with intercept and Zerglings with speed upgrade shouldn't have a problem with retreating/attacking Cobras.. Banelings would get screwed over though.
|
On June 17 2008 02:10 Talith wrote:Since Blizzard added Mothership due to the protoss warship destroying terran ship in the original sc cinematic, how about adding the open top missile launcher unit seen in the Following Cinematic. I know perhaps adding this would be too many 'mech' units but seeing as how viking are air/ground and would most likely primarily be used for AA and quickie "get in/get out" raids.
You mean the one that kills a dragoon from long range and has the same purpose as a sieged tank?
|
Well, read the excitement thread and kinda agree with some of the ideas. So basically trying to come up with some ideas for improving strategical depth in SCII.
Anyway, here we go with my two ideas (and yes, I did search for keywords instead of reading the whole thread so I hope I'm not repeating anything):
1. Have 2 different "levels" of air much like there's cliffs on the ground. For example, units that are lower to the ground may have improved attack power, but units that are in the "higher" air level that can shoot anti-air have an improved attack power on units in that lower air level. Units in a lower level that have anti-air capability may have reduced attack power shooting up at the units in the higher level. Also, this can be done with ground units attacking air if need be.
Obviously, so you can't switch right away there needs to be some mechanism by which you balance the levels. Therefore, there's two different ways you can approach this namely (1) having a clickable button that will transfer the unit to a different air level taking perhaps 5-10s or so (depending on balance) for the unit to move. Perhaps while it's doing this it may have reduced attack abilities or something.. I don't know. That can be sorted out.
Regardless, this could add some interesting strategies if say someone was using mutalisks for harrassment and the other player could come in with his mutalisks at the higher air level to counter the opponents mutalisks. Even though they might have even numbers, the player at the higher air level would be superior and thus able to win the battle. On the other hand, the player at the lower air level would be able to do more damage to the economy or ground buildings. So this will create an interesting dynamic hit-and-run scenarios balanced with avoiding being strategically countered by perhaps an inferior force of units.
2. I went through the thread searching resource sharing and that is definitely an interesting dynamic that should be investigated.
However, my "idea" is adding in a resource upgrade (or rather capacity carry for SCV/drone/probe) at various levels. Well, not really my idea because it is a dynamic of games like AOEII and the like.. but it's a good idea regardless IMO.
Since currently I believe the ability to carry resources has been dropped from 8 to 6 (or last time I heard), this obviously makes for a quicker game in the beginning as you start with more workers, but as the game goes on the resources gathered are slower as compared to the same amount of workers in BW. Thus, for example as you move through the tech you have an option just like upgrades for units that you can upgrade working capacity for +1 resource per carry at possibly even 2 or 3 upgrades as you advance far enough in the tech tree if wanted (much like upgrades).
Clearly, looking at cost-benefit ratio there has to be a balance for the cost especially for +1 in the "early" or even "mid" game as it can lead to a significant advantage; however, I strongly believe this will add to strategical depth of the game. For example, if someone decides to get early +1 resource the longer the game goes on the stronger their economy will be compared to the opponent. This will function like FE builds except it won't actually be a FE build and rather an alternate option that a player can invest in to bolster his economy. This actually creates a very interesting dynamic because unlike a FE build, a player does not have 2 bases to defend (or rather may only have 2 bases to defend instead of 3 and so on). Unlike a FE build though it won't bolster an economy as strongly as an extra expansion, but the results will be tangible after it gets up and running for a bit.
I'd consider +2 but that's a 33% increase (from 6 to 8) which seems like a huge difference... but if it can be balanced it might make the game even more interesting.
Anyway, that's about it. Constructive criticism?
Now back to applications, lol.
|
Jackal getting like an nitro-overdrive-red bull mode where it goe super fast, unable to shoot, and lays down a fiery trail like the sorc in Diablo 2, which damages units that walk on its path...
High templar storm becomes a charging shot like the yamato and regains its awesome damage.
A ground Zerg unit that can 'load' units and/or spells. This unit runs in and when it dies half a dozen zerglings pop out. Or a dark swarm. Or a dark swarm AND zerglings. Or I think this over and realize that it's awesome but completely imbalanced. Crap.
Have a special terrain that damages unit who walk over it. Or slow it down. Or insta-kill a unit.
Just throwing random ideas out there...
|
http://www.wegame.com/watch/Enough_Zerg_More_SC2_Protoss_video/
Watch the video and think: are we losing photon micro? I mean at the end of the vid the guy is pulling his cannons back to stop it being hit (when the cannon is in "move" mode it is not considered a threat anymore and enemy units let it go, after losing focus the cannon redeploys itself and continues firing). Looks like a way to add "things to do" to make up for the mbs and co, but since photons dont move anymore, the thing is lost.
|
On May 31 2008 08:44 ScarFace wrote:
New idea: Remove the Thor, the mothership, medivac, and bring back medic. Don't ruin StarCraft.
|
On June 16 2008 00:22 Ra.Xor.2 wrote:As another idea make it so if you press delete, your camera will follow a unit while still allowing you to cycle hotkeys of other units or buildings. We all know how annoying it is to have spam 9 to watch your scout
yeah that sounds good. in warcraft you could click on the unit photo and get that effect but being able to toggle the camera following it instead of holding down your mouse would be great...
|
On June 18 2008 02:44 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2008 02:10 Talith wrote:Since Blizzard added Mothership due to the protoss warship destroying terran ship in the original sc cinematic, how about adding the open top missile launcher unit seen in the Following Cinematic. I know perhaps adding this would be too many 'mech' units but seeing as how viking are air/ground and would most likely primarily be used for AA and quickie "get in/get out" raids. You mean the one that kills a dragoon from long range and has the same purpose as a sieged tank?
Why would we need this? It appearing in the cinematic is not a good enough reason to add it in the game. In one of the cinematic there were some Terran sitting in a jeep or vehicle of sort when they got ambushed by some Zerg, lets add that vehicle in the game too? Obviously in the future human would have multitude of weaponry at their disposal, cant just add all of them in.
|
hmm I post this in the questions thread but then figured it may should have been here instead:
Nowadays it's very common to watch recorded games on youtube videos instead of starcraft replays. Which, among other advantages, is much more practical and easier for the viewer to watch (no need to install/run starcraft). Can we expect some tool to allow starcraft 2 spectators to watch games without installing/running the whole big and heavy game? Maybe a small replay-only application or even a browser plug-in?
|
You can't watch the replays without the game engine installed. ;;
|
On June 24 2008 09:00 maybenexttime wrote:
You can't watch the replays without the game engine installed. ;; Which is why I am suggesting something... new...
It could have only the simplest parts of the engine necessary for watching replays (ex. no campaigns, videos, menus, bnet support etc)
|
Yeah, a 'small replay-only application' which is an oxymoron.
|
Idea for terrans.
Terrans lack a unit which could act like battering ram. It's one of the reasons tvt is so inispiring. While adding a melee unit would be un-terran, there is another way: something that's tough, doesnt atack but draws enemy fire and could buy time for the army to close in. Simple tractor would be not fun, but heavily armoured APC would be. So some characteristics:
-slow
-has no attack (well maybe it could deal some damage on collision with object at full speed, and in order to deal it again it should move back and charge again. Or make him a charge ability, which after being activated makes damage upon impact but the vehicle can't change course - so enemies should just walk away from it's way).
-massive hp (like bunker)
-can be stacked with infantry (up to 4) but infantry cannot shoot from inside. After being destroyed infantry is released.
-constructed in factory
-not expensive
-by default is attacked by enemy units just as being attack-type.
In short: a slow mobile bunker from which infantry cannot shoot.
The role:
-draws enemy fire from weak terran units to itself
-adds terrans some "breaking" power.
-adds micro: the terran opponent has to unfocus his units from
attacking this one to other units that actually deal damage. And in case of "charge ability"...
-can be used for barricading narrow passeges (u can't build supply depos everywhere)
+feels very terranish
Well I think after some polishing up, it could be a nice addition to terran army. After all it has it's role and things like costs, ability to attack, speed, size can be balanced out.
|
This could seriously imba Terran vs. melee units.
Enough of these rams (not expensive, you say?) could form an impenetrable wall that would be hell for lings and lots to circumvent, and since stalkers/hydras are by nature not good against rines...
Maybe if it was more expensive, or if it was like "Heavy" armor or something that could withstand ranged attacks (ie. fortifications) but got pwned by melee attacks?
|
On June 25 2008 15:00 vand00r wrote:
Maybe if it was more expensive, ?
I never said how cheap it should be.
Everything you point out can be balanced through minor tweaks like costs, build time, HP, armor type (I said nothing about that), movement speed with only size that can be set only once or twice.
One more thought. Obvious one but still (I'll delete it if has been already proposed)
So after watching the new AI pathfinding and all the clumping up one can't be disturbed that his forces will be utterly destroyed by AoE damage. Also the movement of a blob looks ugly to me. I would like the army to move as a hole monolite construction, yet it looks as if it's not an army at all. In tactical strategies like Total War series they have an option to make a "lose formation". Well such a choise could be most useful and implementing it would be not hard. Also some formation fixation could be useful. Like u press Alt+F and the units will not break the formation untill: 1) they die, 2) u tell them not to, 3) the battle starts. The downside is that the clumping up and formation thing requires the player to show his skill and a simple UI option would make the game even more easy.
|
Just a thought:
Since reapers have jetpacks, give ghosts jetpacks too. They are of higher rank and are suppose to be able to afford more expensive equipment. I guess the only minor problem is "Not another C&C!". Heh. But there's no need for the jetpacks to behave exactly like the C&C's version, instead, they could probably contribute to the micro upkeep if they designed them smartly enough.
|
Yeah, stealth infiltration unit with jetpacks, lol.
|
On June 25 2008 15:00 vand00r wrote:
This could seriously imba Terran vs. melee units.
Enough of these rams (not expensive, you say?) could form an impenetrable wall that would be hell for lings and lots to circumvent, and since stalkers/hydras are by nature not good against rines...
Maybe if it was more expensive, or if it was like "Heavy" armor or something that could withstand ranged attacks (ie. fortifications) but got pwned by melee attacks?
you guys are like wannabe programmers, it's funny.
|
SC2 will just be non-innovative CRAAAAP unless we see full terrain deformation.
Since terrain actually matters in the game, everything should be blastable to a point where it can only be traversed by flyers and skimmers.
If i want to turtle up, i should be able to nuke myself an island.
And that's my POV.
|
I had an ability idea for one of the zerg units, although i haven't figured out to which unit the ability might best be suited. I thought the best way to go from here is to get some good input from the TL community.
The ability is a web (like a spiderweb or some other creepy zerglike web perhaps) that can be created within a chokepoint or a valley.
Features of the web:
- Web build time and energy cost needs to be balanced
- Ground units that run into the web will be stuck within it for a period of time, slowing their attack speed (or maybe making them totally unable to attack) before breaking the web.
- Only so many units (however many units it takes to stick the length of the web) can be stuck at one time.
- Web is easily destroyable by any unit that does damage (idk you may need range to destroy with ranged since melee might get stuck unless attack command nullifies the webs ability idk how to go about it plz help
Well i have to go but i will edit more in later maybe when i get back please feel freee to add on to the idea especially how visible it should be. (i thought maybe creatable by OL but not sure maybe ground unit) Thanks! sry so short
|
2 ideas regarding Thor, no idea if were posted, taken from
Keep the Thor
Idea no 1
+ Show Spoiler +SCV would be able to salvage Thor or it's wreckage and build it for example somewhere where normally Thor wouldn't be able to reach.
just realized:
1) In that way Thor could be transported in Medivacs too - it would 2-3 Medivacs and group them together. Killing one wouldn't kill Thor but take out some of it's HP.
The less HP Thor's wreckage would have, the less Medivacs would be needed to transport it after salvaging (possibly only 1?)
2) Transporting Thor could not need whole for example 14/21 slots of 2-3 Medivacs but like 16-18
Idea no 2
+ Show Spoiler +For to Thor to gain Self-Repair it would need SCV to enter it and stay inside when it's wreckage on the battlefield.
In that way self-repair would be explained better and Thor be very safe carrier for SCV with ability to unload it so SCV would be able to repair / build something else.
|
|
|
Nydus Worm Aesthetic Suggestion
Just read OP
btw about me posting ideas from BN forums: I do it because even if someone from Blizz reads those forums to find ideas like this (not to mention Devs already may want to do exactly the same thing)
I don't like the fact that they look like fucking mess and are flooded; they need to change and sending ideas they probably already read, may I hope be the factor to at least do it if not fasten
|
After I read Nyovne's feelings about Banelings I fear they may be overpowered and scare any attempt to move out of base at some point in time, in early game so... here is idea:
Leave temporary (30-90secs) holes whenever unit burrows. If Nomad isn't going to have detection this could make for it and even if Observes still will do, it shouldn't be so easy to say which hole has a unit within and witch not, forcing at least manual check on each to be sure.
BUT detection would still be needed to actually check the holes and be able to click and attack burrowed units.
TBH it wouldn't be anything so new as for example Lurkers can burrow and 'disappear' under debris left by destroyed buildings, especially Zerg ones (as far as I can remember from SC, I haven't seen it in a long time).
It would add a nice factor of threat, something like "oh shit some Banelings were here" but on the other hand if holes with Banelings inside would disappear over time too (longer period?) there still would be that feeling 'I can't see them but they can be there'.
The same thing would go for Ghosts/etc, it would be nice if cloaked units could be spotted by opponent's units bypassing them in very close distance; not detect but more like trace...
maybe by less units if cloaked one would be on the move and more if it would stand still.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Unless they are going with the WC3 system for cloak, you will be able to see a distortion when cloaked units walk by :0
Nomads did have detection in the WWI build at least so I guess they changed that.
Holes leaving marks is, hm, interesting at least.
|
On July 02 2008 21:36 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Unless they are going with the WC3 system for cloak, you will be able to see a distortion when cloaked units walk by :0
Nomads did have detection in the WWI build at least so I guess they changed that.
Holes leaving marks is, hm, interesting at least.
Thanks for saying it's interesting about cloak tho I mean I know it won't be much different from SC1, maybe look somehow cooler but sometimes when I can spot few DTs and there are no Overlords around, all I can say is shit DTs + there is no distortion when unit stays still, unless attacks but that's rather small one...
|
edit: make Thor do AoE damage to closest units around it when it's wreckaged
|
Hello. Ive been thinking of a new upgrade system for zerg.
Its like this: Instead of upgrading armor and attack, the upgrade makes the unit cheaper.
So for example, when up 1 is finish the zergling cost 40 minerals instead of 50 and muta cost maybe 80/80. But why is this system good: Well I think its great if the races is as different as possible and this way of ups suits the zerg with mass swarm-like rather than strong but few. However there´s some problems, when both players are maxed its hard for the zerg, i mean 200supply non upgraded zerg against 200 upgraded toss... so i thought there is to ways to solve this. either give zerg higher supply limit when ups are done, maybe 300? (bad solution), or lower what each units supply count, this is also bad, or rather hard when its comes for lings, how lower the count for them?
Anyway maybe zerg could keep either armor ups or attack ups together with my system.
I havent decided whether it should be universual (and expensive maybe 400/400?) or as with zerg now one for melee, one for range and one for air but at a lower cost(this one i prefer).
Two ups will do (one hor lair, one for hive). zergling 50 - 40 -30
And by the may, the other ups is of course still there (ling speed, ultra armor +2 etc...).
What do u think?
|
On July 03 2008 18:02 happY wrote:
What do u think?
That zerg would be totally useless vs 3/3 armies with their already low damage since 3 less on every attack would be extremely devastating.
I mean, imagine zerglings vs siegetanks if they did 1 dmg per hit, the only way you could kill them then is with friendly fire.
So they would atleast need the damage ups, and ultras are bad without armor ups so they need that too.
|
On July 03 2008 20:06 Klockan3 wrote:That zerg would be totally useless vs 3/3 armies with their already low damage since 3 less on every attack would be extremely devastating. I mean, imagine zerglings vs siegetanks if they did 1 dmg per hit, the only way you could kill them then is with friendly fire. So they would atleast need the damage ups, and ultras are bad without armor ups so they need that too.
Not if the zergs are almost twice as many as they would with the current up system. Of course they have to balance this, AND as i wrote in my post this maybe should be combined with an attack up.
I dont understand ur critizism.
|
Hmm, i got a couple of ideas so i better spit em out (might miss some):
- the ability to give your teammates minerals/gas would be nice (Clicking a button located over the mini-map)
- A spellcaster for the Terran-player that can cast a spell (named for example Gas Grenade or just Grenade) that a unit throws and does area damage (almost like the High Templar's Psionic Storm).
- i want a unit that can shoot missile's at ground units!! FFS, like a Anti-Air Tank that can attack BOTH air and ground units with its rockets (doing like half damage at ground and full damage at air units).
- Stronger Vultures cause i hate Explosive damage, and i would love it if Vultures could place Explosive Charges at certain places doing big area damage but they can't move like the Spider Mine.
- a huge mechanical Marine that does area damage with its machine gun bursts.
- Ability to change your online ID? i can never make up my mind about that!
|
Terran Engineer - Goes inside buildings or vehicles and increases its efficiency, ie. faster rate of fire, more damage, etc. etc. Only one Engineer per building or vehicle. When the building or vehicle is destroyed, so is the Engineer.
Some Zerg unit - Burrows underground, and all nearby units slowly gets pulled towards it. Units can attack from inside it, closer they get towards the epicenter, the harder it is to escape from. It does no damage, but I thought that since Zerg has no devastating AOE moves (they got rid of plague, right?) thought they should do some more damage with splash damages.
Protoss Bionic Chamber - A building. Put a Protoss unit inside it, wait a couple seconds and it changes into a "hero" version. I thought this would have been an acceptable way to intergrate some Warcraft into Starcraft, without the "one unit to rule them all" thingy.
Critter - Charizard critter, I dunno I felt like I should add a fourth thing.
EDIT: Okay, Zerg Grudgling - It infests a unit and after it dies it comes back to life, albiet a bit mindless and with a timed life.
|
On July 03 2008 22:19 KiN2 wrote:
Hmm, i got a couple of ideas so i better spit em out (might miss some):
- the ability to give your teammates minerals/gas would be nice (Clicking a button located over the mini-map)
- A spellcaster for the Terran-player that can cast a spell (named for example Gas Grenade or just Grenade) that a unit throws and does area damage (almost like the High Templar's Psionic Storm).
- i want a unit that can shoot missile's at ground units!! FFS, like a Anti-Air Tank that can attack BOTH air and ground units with its rockets (doing like half damage at ground and full damage at air units).
- Stronger Vultures cause i hate Explosive damage, and i would love it if Vultures could place Explosive Charges at certain places doing big area damage but they can't move like the Spider Mine.
- a huge mechanical Marine that does area damage with its machine gun bursts.
- Ability to change your online ID? i can never make up my mind about that!
I don't think that every Terran unit should have explosive, targetable AOE Damage.
|
yeah, sometimes I wish flaming was encouraged in this thread.
|
To my understanding, Maelstrom, Ensnare, Mind Control, and Stasis are all out in the current build (though Force Field/Antigrav have a similar effect. Here's something along related lines:
Give the Overseer a long-range channeling spell that causes targeted units to go berserk, moving and attacking randomly. This would require direct line-of-sight (from the casting Overseer, which should factor into its vision mechanism) and drain energy proportional to the HP of the unit its targeting for balance purposes (you could berserk a Marine for a few minutes, but a Battlecruiser for no more than a few seconds).
Additionally, though this might be overdoing it, the Overseer's <control provided> would vary based on its energy (e.g. base of 8, +1 for every 50 energy), and while it's channeling, it provides no control at all.
Conceptually, it's the Overseer pumping massive amounts of psionic energy at the target, causing the loss of all higher brain function. Similar to the Dark Archon's "transfer of will," this just isn't quite as refined.
I imagine that this would be used mostly in delaying attacks and actual defending, since you'd need to have the Overseers in place long enough before-hand so that they have enough sight range. Additionally, it gives the Zerg player a lot of flexibility in dealing with harass, which it seems that they're currently lacking. See a Dropship heading for a cliff? Just Berserk it, and buy the time to handle it properly. Late-game, you could even build up a group of Overseers and use this to break stalemates.
I think that it's a neat mechanism that adds a distinct personality to the Overseer, one that fits its description and role in the game rather well. What do you think about it?
|
just realized with that with creep drop zergs can hide tech, nice
|
Lurkers should move underground and deploy, so they are visible when firing.
This will make them a lot more interesting(and useful), since they would be able to sneak or advance against an enemy without detection(like DTs). He won't need detection to fight them, so they still have a fairly unique invisbility, but they would be able to observe the enemy and deploy in very advantegious positions(like right next to a group of marines - no need for hold lurker).
|
like a reverse lurker...a rekrul!
and finally blance is restored in the universe. It'd be an interesting change up for sure. But in SC1 you see a lot of toss just running over lurkers and the only thing that prevents them from doing so is the vision, so lurkers would need more HP or more damage or something. depending on how fast it deploys
|
On July 13 2008 17:54 lololol wrote:
Lurkers should move underground and deploy, so they are visible when firing.
This will make them a lot more interesting(and useful), since they would be able to sneak or advance against an enemy without detection(like DTs). He won't need detection to fight them, so they still have a fairly unique invisbility, but they would be able to observe the enemy and deploy in very advantegious positions(like right next to a group of marines - no need for hold lurker).
omfg agreed!
And I'd want some kind of range reducing spell, like queen's ensnare reduce speed, maybe something like dark swarm for a new range reducing purpose? Optical bombardment might be good too for range reduction.
|
For the record I still like the reverse lurker idea, but I agree there is a balance to be had vs a regular toss army. Are burrowed banelings going to fill the gap there?
Points that need great attention IMO are
- how fast it can go into attack mode (can it snipe units and run well enough to be effective early game)
- should it be detectable with a "blur" like a DT while moving burrowed? They will want this to be consistent with the official burrow-moving defiler replacement. Does this screw over one unit or the other?
- did I hear some talk about burrow-moving units going through cliffs? Likely too powerful.
- the obvious question, would this somehow make lurkers too good? From a BW perspective, I mostly see it as a balancing act that would probably make them perform their role better in many situations, while probably watering down the potential to end a match with 2 lurkers rushing a worker line.
- if they go into attack mode too slowly, would ranged enemies just be able to run out of the way each time you tried to engage? Would a flank/ambush make up for this?
[EDIT]
- hmm, considering the lurkers only do 10 dmg to marines right now, and more likely 9 damage due to armor upgrades early on, would being visible to marines make them too weak? 5 to 6 shots (hp upgrade) to kill a marine? If healing is there, this could be big.
other thoughts here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=74932¤tpage=2#37
|
On July 16 2008 18:09 evanthebouncy! wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2008 17:54 lololol wrote:
Lurkers should move underground and deploy, so they are visible when firing.
This will make them a lot more interesting(and useful), since they would be able to sneak or advance against an enemy without detection(like DTs). He won't need detection to fight them, so they still have a fairly unique invisbility, but they would be able to observe the enemy and deploy in very advantegious positions(like right next to a group of marines - no need for hold lurker). omfg agreed! And I'd want some kind of range reducing spell, like queen's ensnare reduce speed, maybe something like dark swarm for a new range reducing purpose? Optical bombardment might be good too for range reduction.
At a glance, a range reducing spell sounds very interesting. I think it'd have to last a long time to be effective, but would permanent be overkill?
|
On July 16 2008 18:09 evanthebouncy! wrote:
And I'd want some kind of range reducing spell, like queen's ensnare reduce speed, maybe something like dark swarm for a new range reducing purpose? Optical bombardment might be good too for range reduction.
How about a darkness spell? Cast by an air unit, reduces sight range of units caught inside to 2 (essentially blinding every unit in the radius, which essentially lowers their range
|
Please add an offer draw button.
|
Okay, since the gas thing is the new "hot topic" now...
There are two levels of gas mining in the refinery. The first level the refinery acts like the one in Brood War. You build it over a geyser then mine. Simple as that. The next level acts in the same way but it pulls out gas faster. The drawback is that it takes time and mineral to open up this level and the depleted yield is smaller...1 gas per trip instead of 2...
So it kind of stays along the same blueprint except there isn't excessive worker micro and stuff. So you can opt for a steady flow of gas, or take time and money to have a large surge of gas. I guess it shouldn't be able to revert back and that workers can't mine inside of it while it's changing...
|
bring the scout into sc2
make it the same type of unit except cheaper
scouts ftw, my favorite unit in the game BY FAR
|
How about giving the Terrans the standard "drill deeper," the Protoss a tech for Assimilators that replenishes Gas, and the Zerg a Hive-level upgrade for Extractors that allows you to put Drones in without a drop-off point.
So Terrans spend directly whenever they need a heavy infusion of Vespene for a specific timing, the Protoss have a generally more cost-effective tool that lets them build up reserves over time, and the Zerg will have more of an incentive to seize map control and cap geysers like mad :D
|
What about a different slider for unit noises and noises like production cuz i like it louder if i hear something like "You building is done" or "Goliath on line" vs *gunshot fire noises and dead zerglings*
|
On July 18 2008 09:51 IzzyCraft wrote:
What about a different slider for unit noises and noises like production cuz i like it louder if i hear something like "You building is done" or "Goliath on line" vs *gunshot fire noises and dead zerglings*
That's a very good idea
|
On July 18 2008 09:51 IzzyCraft wrote:
What about a different slider for unit noises and noises like production cuz i like it louder if i hear something like "You building is done" or "Goliath on line" vs *gunshot fire noises and dead zerglings*
ya good idea
|
So I've been silently following TL for a while now, and I agree that so far, SC2's terran is lacking in pizzazz, especially the Thor. So here's an idea I had to spice it up. Although I'll realize how dumb a first post this was in a few hours, Scorched Earth seems totally awesome to me at this very moment. I was going to start a new thread for it, but I didn't know about the 10-day thing. Anyway here it is:
Ability Name: Scorched Earth
Upgrade Researched at: wherever
Upgrade Cost: 200 minerals, 200 gas
Cost to use: 150 minerals, 250 gas
Effect: The thor becomes immobile and takes no actions for 10 seconds, then detonates, effectively dealing nuclear explosion damage centered upon itself, affecting both allies and enemy units and structures. While flying units will take half damage from this ability, mineral patches and vespene geysers will suffer the nuke damage in resource count, hence the moniker Scorched Earth.
Note: If the thor is locked down, time bombed, or destroyed (or any status that designates loss of player control) while immobile, the blast does not go off and the ability cost is not refunded. If the thor is hit with anti-gravity while immobile, the blast does full nuke damage to air units only, and resource nodes are unaffected. All numbers and effects are subject to balance and open to suggestions/critique.
The Scorched Earth Program was developed during the Mengsk Era of the Confederacy as a weapon of last resort, a sign of the growing desperation thrust upon the Terrans as a result of the many growing threats to humanity. Not even the most loyal of Thor crewmen are told of their craft's ability to transform into a walking fission bomb; only several elite members of the Confederacy's R&D team, and Arcturus Mengsk, safe in Confederacy Headquarters, his finger on the shiny red button...
|
On July 18 2008 11:52 Flakes wrote:
So I've been silently following TL for a while now, and I agree that so far, SC2's terran is lacking in pizzazz, especially the Thor. So here's an idea I had to spice it up. Although I'll realize how dumb a first post this was in a few hours, Scorched Earth seems totally awesome to me at this very moment. I was going to start a new thread for it, but I didn't know about the 10-day thing. Anyway here it is:
Ability Name: Scorched Earth
Upgrade Researched at: wherever
Upgrade Cost: 200 minerals, 200 gas
Cost to use: 150 minerals, 250 gas
Effect: The thor becomes immobile and takes no actions for 10 seconds, then detonates, effectively dealing nuclear explosion damage centered upon itself, affecting both allies and enemy units and structures. While flying units will take half damage from this ability, mineral patches and vespene geysers will suffer the nuke damage in resource count, hence the moniker Scorched Earth.
Note: If the thor is locked down, time bombed, or destroyed (or any status that designates loss of player control) while immobile, the blast does not go off and the ability cost is not refunded. If the thor is hit with anti-gravity while immobile, the blast does full nuke damage to air units only, and resource nodes are unaffected. All numbers and effects are subject to balance and open to suggestions/critique.
The Scorched Earth Program was developed during the Mengsk Era of the Confederacy as a weapon of last resort, a sign of the growing desperation thrust upon the Terrans as a result of the many growing threats to humanity. Not even the most loyal of Thor crewmen are told of their craft's ability to transform into a walking fission bomb; only several elite members of the Confederacy's R&D team, and Arcturus Mengsk, safe in Confederacy Headquarters, his finger on the shiny red button...
a) welcome
b) interesting idea, but tbh it sounds a bit like dota and not an RTS.
c) still this idea is 99% better than most of the crap that gets posted on here, well done for doing such thoughtout thinking and non-flaming
|
And now for another idea from moi
The Terrans need more internationalism. By that I mean with the lack of the Valkyrie, we need German/Russian influences. And so...
The Terran Cossack
It will be "influenced" by the Protoss Dragoon, in the sense that it is a 4-legged walker. However, there is also a marine with a Russian accent mounted in the cupola.
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
The Cossack, like the Russian troops it's named after, is a kind of cavalry unit-it's quite fast and mobile, but it does not have a very strong attack, especially against armored units.
100/25, 2 Supply, 100 HP, 1/4 Armor, 8 Normal Damage (attacks like an unstimmed marine) Speed: About a Dragoon, Armor: Heavy or w/e
Dig-In
The Cossack has an ability where the legs actually dig into the ground (animation similar to burrowing), entrenching the Cossack and rendering it more stable. In addition, the vulnerable belly armor is now hull-down, rendering it impossible to hit. Thus, attacks will have to go against the front/side/rear armor, which is as tough as Battlecruiser plating.
What makes this unit so useful? In a push, a flanking/pincer attack by a zerg or protoss can easily overwhelm even a large group of marine/marauder or jackal/tank. The Terrans have grown wise to this, and thus they use the Cossack as not only cavalry units but as a way to absorb weak hits and reduce the amount of melee units that can attack vulnerable ranged units. It's like the wagon surround against Indian raiding parties.
Strong vs. Zerglings, Marines, Zealots, Roaches, Jackals, Mutalisks, and other units with relatively weak attacks.
Weak vs. anything that does more than 10 damage per shot. Banelings. Warprays. Storm. Antigravity. Disease. Swarm. Siege Tank splash.
This is a semi-weak attempt to help revive the terran push from becoming some biomech garbage.
|
On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range.
|
On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range.
marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units?
Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm....
Now what about charging zealots? hmmm.......
|
On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm.......
The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw.
|
On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw.
You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems?
and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash.
|
On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash.
Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version.
Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units.
|
On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units.
What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines.
What counters Zealots... Vultures
What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels
What counters Dark Templar... Vultures.
That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game?
The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings.
|
On July 19 2008 01:48 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units. What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines. What counters Zealots... Vultures What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels What counters Dark Templar... Vultures. That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game? The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings.
No matter what you say the thor is a walking wall with its 300+300hh, 3 base armor and self repair, adding another walking wall wont make the concept any more interesting.
And actually stimmed marines do counter zerglings hard while firebats only counters zerglings eventhough they do it better but since they only counter lings they are useless compared to marines.
Also marines + marauders will counter all of those mentioned units, add in a ghost or two to counter zealots. And if you want the ultimate counter for all of the above mentioned melee units, build a damn banshee, they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG and thus will slaughter the melee units that can't fight back.
Trust me, a unit whose only role is to be a walking wall is the worst concept ever, and the current terran have no problems with melee units...
If you read what people have said marauders + marines pwn melee units.
|
On July 19 2008 03:00 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 01:48 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units. What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines. What counters Zealots... Vultures What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels What counters Dark Templar... Vultures. That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game? The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings. No matter what you say the thor is a walking wall with its 300+300hh, 3 base armor and self repair, adding another walking wall wont make the concept any more interesting. And actually stimmed marines do counter zerglings hard while firebats only counters zerglings eventhough they do it better but since they only counter lings they are useless compared to marines. Also marines + marauders will counter all of those mentioned units, add in a ghost or two to counter zealots. And if you want the ultimate counter for all of the above mentioned melee units, build a damn banshee, they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG and thus will slaughter the melee units that can't fight back. Trust me, a unit whose only role is to be a walking wall is the worst concept ever, and the current terran have no problems with melee units... If you read what people have said marauders + marines pwn melee units.
Thors are too unwieldy to use as walls because they are too slow and expensive. Walls are supposed to be cheap and expendable, not more expensive than the units they are protecting. Not to mention that Thors are at the top of the tech chain, and well... that doesn't make much sense for a wall.
The Cossack is not quite just a walking wall. It's a cavalry unit that can deploy into a wall, like the opposite of a siege tank. If you read the unit specifications there would be two things that stick out:
A) It is a fast "walker" unit that has a relatively fast but low damage attack. As such, it can be used to harass enemy units like for instance a group of zerglings that is moving about trying to flank or immortals that are being warped in in a small protoss encamptment. They somewhat function as mobile turrets, giving you a counter against light air that isn't infantry based as well. Worker harass will be far more difficult as only two can fit in a dropship at a time, the damage is too low to wipe out probes quickly, and they are expensive for worker harass.
B)Another use, though, is in conjunction with jackals in order to flank an enemy force, or to deflect a flank. A group of dug-in Cossacks can create small chokepoints that the Jackals can abuse with their linear splash while the Cossacks absorb Hydralisk/Stalker fire. But if a Terran ball is being attacked on two sides, whereas Thors will have a difficult time trudging into proper positions, Cossacks, with their quick speed, can quickly shift positions and save at least part of the ball from being ripped to shreds.
Addressing your points:
Again, you say to fight those units we need Marine Marauder. Well, I don't want to have to build Marine Marauder in every single game, and have to tech two different ways (infantry and mech) as a result, especially with the new gas system..
And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them.
|
Idea to make the game macro harder to master without using artificial blocks. Focusing o natural gameplay enhancement like Mutate Larvae and Reactor:
- Protoss:
Probes can build a super pylon in addition to normal pylons. These super pylons are temporary. Provides the same aura normal pylons does. Plus their aura increases the production speed of production buildings (or cooldown of warp gates) by 25%ish per super pylon. Up to 100% (x2 faster production or 1/2 build time).
- Terran:
Reactors increase production speed by 50% instead of 100%. But they cost 50% their old price and you can use up to 4 reactors per production building (total 200% speed increase, 3x faster or 1/3 build time).
- Zerg
Mutate Larvae can also be used on drones. Mutating it back to a larvae which can then be used to produce another unit. (basically sacrificing workers to produce combat units faster without needing to build more hatcheries)
|
Ok, this has been a nagging me for a long time. I don't know what to do... it's such a simple fix... how can I make Blizzard listen? Oh, the frustration! *cries* Please, somebody with authority, make them listen... they MUST listen! *cries some more*
Move the health bars from the units' heads to the units' feet!
It looked great in Starcraft. I don't understand why they didn't do that in WC3, because it looks like shit (like in all RTS games with flying health bars). They're so simple to move, and have such a great visual impact. The guy or gal who knew that must've moved out from Blizzard when they began making WoW (where head health bars make more sense).
|
On July 25 2008 07:12 jeb wrote:
Ok, this has been a nagging me for a long time. I don't know what to do... it's such a simple fix... how can I make Blizzard listen? Oh, the frustration! *cries* Please, somebody with authority, make them listen... they MUST listen! *cries some more*
Move the health bars from the units' heads to the units' feet!
It looked great in Starcraft. I don't understand why they didn't do that in WC3, because it looks like shit (like in all RTS games with flying health bars). They're so simple to move, and have such a great visual impact. The guy or gal who knew that must've moved out from Blizzard when they began making WoW (where head health bars make more sense).
I share your preference but I dont think it's a huge issue. What I'm more annoyed about is how the whole scheme of what is shown is war3 verbatim. Keep the health bar on your selected units visible without holding alt please.
Another thing, with the subgroups, please allow me to explicitly select a unit from the selected units display with a single click...
|
United States42616 Posts
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
On July 27 2008 16:10 Kwark wrote:
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
So that's only for hot keyed gates or if you drag-box and select multiple gates? I thought the latest version played at Paris was where you had to go 1zzzzz?
|
On July 27 2008 16:10 Kwark wrote:
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
Criticism: Effecient macro will still allow a skillful player to have near perfect macro without returning to base, leading to the stagnation and overconcentration on micro, death of multi-tasking, etc etc
|
OK, here's the idea.
What if we give tier 2 zerg queen ability to spawn 2 scourge which last X seconds.
-This will give zerg good counter against medivac, phase prism, overlord+worm drops and banshees, phoenix, collosus.
-Emphasize queens role as a defensive unit.
-Shouldn't affect mid-late game air battles.
-May give cheap and fast scouting for zerg.
-May complicate scouting/detection for protoss.
-ZvZ may become an overlord slaughter.
|
On July 29 2008 15:59 Kad3Ch wrote:
OK, here's the idea.
What if we give tier 2 zerg queen ability to spawn 2 scourge which last X seconds.
-This will give zerg good counter against medivac, phase prism, overlord+worm drops and banshees, phoenix, collosus.
-Emphasize queens role as a defensive unit.
-Shouldn't affect mid-late game air battles.
-May give cheap and fast scouting for zerg.
-May complicate scouting/detection for protoss.
-ZvZ may become an overlord slaughter.
This is actually pretty cool, and makes a lot of sense.
|
On July 25 2008 03:28 VIB wrote:
Idea to make the game macro harder to master without using artificial blocks. Focusing o natural gameplay enhancement like Mutate Larvae and Reactor:
- Protoss:
Probes can build a super pylon in addition to normal pylons. These super pylons are temporary. Provides the same aura normal pylons does. Plus their aura increases the production speed of production buildings (or cooldown of warp gates) by 25%ish per super pylon. Up to 100% (x2 faster production or 1/2 build time).
- Terran:
Reactors increase production speed by 50% instead of 100%. But they cost 50% their old price and you can use up to 4 reactors per production building (total 200% speed increase, 3x faster or 1/3 build time).
- Zerg
Mutate Larvae can also be used on drones. Mutating it back to a larvae which can then be used to produce another unit. (basically sacrificing workers to produce combat units faster without needing to build more hatcheries)
your zerg idea is bad but the others are even worse.
Previously Posted:
"And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them."
I'm sure he meant something more like, build guardians, ultralisks can't kill them.
|
On July 29 2008 22:47 dcttr66 wrote:
Previously Posted:
"And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them."
I'm sure he meant something more like, build guardians, ultralisks can't kill them.
no im saying how its like "banshees are air, zealots cant attack air, use banshees against zealots." is like wraiths vs. ultras.
|
actually he said this "they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG"
and wraiths do not do this so like i said, it's more like guardians.
i mean, really, the ultralisks are stronger than the zealots and the wraiths are weaker than the banshees so why are you exaggerating like this?
it's like you're saying that killing a fruit fly is the same as killing a fish. neither of them can fight back.
it sounds like you want zealots to attack air.
|
After lurking for some time though teamliquid i decided to post my own idea
Right now the Nydus worm must be built on creep, making it almost exacltly like a nydus canal, it nerfs the wrom so the zerg can't just make 7 worms in terran/protoss without warning, but it doesn't fix the problem when attacking another zerg, and remains inbalanced anytime a zerg fights another zerg... right?
So, my sugestion is basicaly to restrict how fast nydus worms can be built in a certian time using either cooldown or energy from the nydus warren (or is it called nydus network? can't remember)
-You can only build 1 Nydus warren(/Network?), but once it is destroyed it may be rebuilt, but you'll lose all units within it. The nydus warren has 250 energy (maybe +50 with some reserch?) and each worm costs around 150 energy. (or just give it a cooldown, i like the energy idea best tho)
-Nydus worms can spawn anywere with vision, but their build time is incresed (6-7 secs?) also a Nydus worm can be moved, this will cost the Nydus warren some energy but the worm will be able to move anywere were there is vision.
-You can also build Nydus canals that will work much like thouse in SC1, but instead of having to build an exit they will conect to the nydus network.
|
On July 30 2008 09:58 dcttr66 wrote:
actually he said this "they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG"
and wraiths do not do this so like i said, it's more like guardians.
i mean, really, the ultralisks are stronger than the zealots and the wraiths are weaker than the banshees so why are you exaggerating like this?
it's like you're saying that killing a fruit fly is the same as killing a fish. neither of them can fight back.
it sounds like you want zealots to attack air.
no, i'm saying that just because a unit can't attack air doesn't mean that air units are a good counter for it. Please read the actual thing.
Sure, banshees do more damage to ground, but why are you wasting banshees to kill zealots anyways when they could be raping probes? or buildings? or... w/e?
|
On July 31 2008 08:27 Caller wrote:
Sure, banshees do more damage to ground, but why are you wasting banshees to kill zealots anyways when they could be raping probes? or buildings? or... w/e?
Maybe there are cannons near the probes? And why would you attack buildings if you can attack units, units are always worth more per hp than buildings...
On July 31 2008 08:27 Caller wrote:
no, i'm saying that just because a unit can't attack air doesn't mean that air units are a good counter for it. Please read the actual thing.
But as of now banshees are a good counter vs them. Cloak + high damage + flying + fast makes them perfect for it. And yes, if the wraith had the battlecruiser atg laser they would be good vs zealots, and thats what the banshee is, a wraith with ata but atg rivaling the old bc.
|
Here is my idea:
The game starts with mbs/automine/autosplit/all this crap, ok, but since your first match at b.net your apm reaches 150-200(or more ^^) , it automatically changes to a mode where there is not any nooobie feature, and then forever in your b.net acc you will not have mbs or else, whatever, its good ... at least to me,haha so those freaking noobies will have to play forever as noobies if they want mbs back ^^
|
On August 02 2008 02:40 Ki_Do wrote:
Here is my idea:
The game starts with mbs/automine/autosplit/all this crap, ok, but since your first match at b.net your apm reaches 150-200(or more ^^) , it automatically changes to a mode where there is not any nooobie feature, and then forever in your b.net acc you will not have mbs or else, whatever, its good ... at least to me,haha so those freaking noobies will have to play forever as noobies if they want mbs back ^^
shut up, seriously
|
give me a better idea to solve the macro problem...
|
On July 31 2008 17:45 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2008 08:27 Caller wrote:
Sure, banshees do more damage to ground, but why are you wasting banshees to kill zealots anyways when they could be raping probes? or buildings? or... w/e? Maybe there are cannons near the probes? And why would you attack buildings if you can attack units, units are always worth more per hp than buildings... Show nested quote +On July 31 2008 08:27 Caller wrote:
no, i'm saying that just because a unit can't attack air doesn't mean that air units are a good counter for it. Please read the actual thing. But as of now banshees are a good counter vs them. Cloak + high damage + flying + fast makes them perfect for it. And yes, if the wraith had the battlecruiser atg laser they would be good vs zealots, and thats what the banshee is, a wraith with ata but atg rivaling the old bc.
So clearly in order to win a Terran player has to get banshees if the enemy builds zealots.
|
[B]On August 02 2008 03:25 Ki_Do wrote:
give me a better idea to solve the macro problem...
Remove MBS?
|
i just realize my paranoid is becoming flood to the forums sorry all~
|
Idea: How to fix the Thor and how to boost the terran sieging capabilities without overlapping with warp in and the nydus worm.
Just a thought. This is how it currently works.
Terran : Good transport
Protoss: Average transport + average "teleporting"
Zerg: Good Teleporting
It's pretty much "even" but endgame the terrans will have a harder time invading a well protected base if all they have are dropships. But thats good because it makes the races more different. Terrans = High defense, low attack (give or take).
So how about this?
The Thor: Make it a medium range (Goliath missiles without the upgrade) tanking unit specialized at busting buildings (extra damage).
Build by SCVs (because thats so cool!)
Give it a "nano-repair" passive ability that constantly repairs it (unfortunatly, just like the roach) and make it so that when they die, the wreckage stays indefinitly on the ground until repaired by an SCV.
It would be alot like the Stone Giants from WC3:TFT and the role doesnt quite overlap with the siege tank. (Glaive Thrower VS Stone Giant) Stone giants are used to take punishement (hardened skin) and to destroy static defenses (grab tree).
And think about it lorewise, the Thor is pretty much built for the same purpose. It's huge, very strong, but it's also very slow, so bad at tracking anything that moves. It would be good for A-A as a mobile missile battery but it just seems like a waste of such a cool unit model. An anyone who played the current build said they arent worth it.
Also: This solves the problem of terran mobility. They can't teleport to the backside of the enemy's base with a warp-in lookalike so they just blast their way through!
Terran army sample: M&M, Vikings, Siege tanks and 2 Thors spearheading the whole thing.
What do you think?
|
[QUOTE]On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:
So how about this?
The Thor: Make it a medium range (Goliath missiles without the upgrade) tanking unit specialized at busting buildings (extra damage).
Build by SCVs (because thats so cool!)
Give it a "nano-repair" passive ability that constantly repairs it (unfortunatly, just like the roach) and make it so that when they die, the wreckage stays indefinitly on the ground until repaired by an SCV.
[QUOTE]On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:
It would be alot like the Stone Giants from WC3:TFT and the role doesnt quite overlap with the siege tank. (Glaive Thrower VS Stone Giant) Stone giants are used to take punishement (hardened skin) and to destroy static defenses (grab tree).
And think about it lorewise, the Thor is pretty much built for the same purpose. It's huge, very strong, but it's also very slow, so bad at tracking anything that moves. It would be good for A-A as a mobile missile battery but it just seems like a waste of such a cool unit model. An anyone who played the current build said they arent worth it.
Also: This solves the problem of terran mobility. They can't teleport to the backside of the enemy's base with a warp-in lookalike so they just blast their way through!
Terran army sample: M&M, Vikings, Siege tanks and 2 Thors spearheading the whole thing.
What do you think?[/QUOTE]
It sounds pretty much like an older version of the Thor alredy updated because it did not fit the game well. Also i belive it alredy works like a movile AA wall that can destroy buildings and static defenses. So are you porposing the thing to stay the same?
|
On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:So how about this? The Thor: Make it a medium range (Goliath missiles without the upgrade) tanking unit specialized at busting buildings (extra damage). Build by SCVs (because thats so cool!) Give it a "nano-repair" passive ability that constantly repairs it (unfortunatly, just like the roach) and make it so that when they die, the wreckage stays indefinitly on the ground until repaired by an SCV. Show nested quote +On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:
It would be alot like the Stone Giants from WC3:TFT and the role doesnt quite overlap with the siege tank. (Glaive Thrower VS Stone Giant) Stone giants are used to take punishement (hardened skin) and to destroy static defenses (grab tree).
And think about it lorewise, the Thor is pretty much built for the same purpose. It's huge, very strong, but it's also very slow, so bad at tracking anything that moves. It would be good for A-A as a mobile missile battery but it just seems like a waste of such a cool unit model. An anyone who played the current build said they arent worth it.
Also: This solves the problem of terran mobility. They can't teleport to the backside of the enemy's base with a warp-in lookalike so they just blast their way through!
Terran army sample: M&M, Vikings, Siege tanks and 2 Thors spearheading the whole thing.
What do you think? It sounds pretty much like an older version of the Thor alredy updated because it did not fit the game well. Also i belive it alredy works like a movile AA wall that can destroy buildings and static defenses. So are you porposing the thing to stay the same?
The old Thor (lets call it Thor 1.0) was a beefy mech with artillery, as it was shown in that gameplay demo from blizzard. It was changed because it's role clearly overlapped the siege tank's. Which is heavy artillery.
The Thor 2.0 is weaker (I saw one get his ass kicked by a handful of stalkers in a few seconds) and is a mobile A-A platform. Flavor wise it's not really cool.
What I suggest is to make it medium range, slightly longer than marines, so no artillery. And I also suggest that they make it tougher so that it can actually STAY in the front line for more than 10 seconds. No Terran unit can do this right now. The Protoss have their Zealots and Immortals to take the punishement. The zerg have a ridiculous amount of zerglings and they also have Ultralisks. The strongest Terran unit after the Thor is the siege tank, which stays behind the front line.
To whoever played WC3, I'm proposing the exact same thing as Glaive Throwers (Long range siege) and Stone Giants (Short Range Siege/Tanker).
|
On August 09 2008 03:23 Krowser wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:So how about this? The Thor: Make it a medium range (Goliath missiles without the upgrade) tanking unit specialized at busting buildings (extra damage). Build by SCVs (because thats so cool!) Give it a "nano-repair" passive ability that constantly repairs it (unfortunatly, just like the roach) and make it so that when they die, the wreckage stays indefinitly on the ground until repaired by an SCV. On August 08 2008 22:59 Krowser wrote:
It would be alot like the Stone Giants from WC3:TFT and the role doesnt quite overlap with the siege tank. (Glaive Thrower VS Stone Giant) Stone giants are used to take punishement (hardened skin) and to destroy static defenses (grab tree).
And think about it lorewise, the Thor is pretty much built for the same purpose. It's huge, very strong, but it's also very slow, so bad at tracking anything that moves. It would be good for A-A as a mobile missile battery but it just seems like a waste of such a cool unit model. An anyone who played the current build said they arent worth it.
Also: This solves the problem of terran mobility. They can't teleport to the backside of the enemy's base with a warp-in lookalike so they just blast their way through!
Terran army sample: M&M, Vikings, Siege tanks and 2 Thors spearheading the whole thing.
What do you think? It sounds pretty much like an older version of the Thor alredy updated because it did not fit the game well. Also i belive it alredy works like a movile AA wall that can destroy buildings and static defenses. So are you porposing the thing to stay the same? The old Thor (lets call it Thor 1.0) was a beefy mech with artillery, as it was shown in that gameplay demo from blizzard. It was changed because it's role clearly overlapped the siege tank's. Which is heavy artillery. The Thor 2.0 is weaker (I saw one get his ass kicked by a handful of stalkers in a few seconds) and is a mobile A-A platform. Flavor wise it's not really cool. What I suggest is to make it medium range, slightly longer than marines, so no artillery. And I also suggest that they make it tougher so that it can actually STAY in the front line for more than 10 seconds. No Terran unit can do this right now. The Protoss have their Zealots and Immortals to take the punishement. The zerg have a ridiculous amount of zerglings and they also have Ultralisks. The strongest Terran unit after the Thor is the siege tank, which stays behind the front line. To whoever played WC3, I'm proposing the exact same thing as Glaive Throwers (Long range siege) and Stone Giants (Short Range Siege/Tanker).
As much as I hate the idea of SC2 being inspired by WC3 units, I'm actually liking this idea. A static-defense-breaker sounds like a great role for the Thor.
The only problem that it raises is that the (already low) Terran mobility is further decreased by having to keep your forces with such a slow unit for support. This is especially a problem against, say, Nydus Worm counterattacks.
|
I want bridges you can travel both over and under. Or at least make it possible in map editor. If memory serves me correctly, it isn't possible in Warcraft 3...
Oh! And also some buildings, like evolution chambers and templar archives don't show when they are researching upgrades and whatnot whereas buildings such as forges and engineering bays do via blinking lights and stuff. I thought it'd be nice if all buildings gave off some sort of affirmation that they are doing something.
And make it possible for terrain to have effects. Like slow down unit's movement speed when they cross over that small patch of mud, or reduce their vision by half when they travel through tall grass.
Also, when you save an screen via F keys, I thought it'd be pretty cool if it showed you where you saved. Like there'll be three blank mini screens on your top left corner, when you save F1, it shows you a what's saved at F1 at the first screen.
|
Remove unit selection completely, all units must be individually microd.
|
On November 09 2007 18:40 Fen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2007 18:19 Spartan wrote:
Like the Zealot's charge ability, yeah its cool, but I'd rather see it user controllable to use the charge ability like a stimpack. By giving the players control over the charge, it opens up more micro opportunities and prevents baiting. But then if you do that, youve basically just given zealots stim packs.
but right now, with the charge ability on automatic, you can argue zealots have permanant stim already. i dont see any problem with having charge be activate-controlled. it could even be a toggle instead of insteant charge. another possibility yet would be to enable charge for 3 seconds when u press the button to activate it, so it's not instant click, but it's well within the time frame zealots would walk towards and engage.
so giving zealot stimpacks, if it even is an equivlant analogy, isn't a problem at all. it's more like a momentary burst of speed (maybe comparable to a nerfed semi-blink) that isn't comparable to an increased attack rate or a true movement speed like marines, lings, or hydras.
i love the idea, and how you spotted a potential problem for zealots. and since zealots have a cooldown for charge, the baiting could even be to "use up" the charge ability, like they plagued to use up medic energy for less effiency in fighting. but of course wasting a charge really isn't much compared to damaging it half way, or making the other player use up APM and mental concern on zealot pulls.
|
|
|
On August 14 2008 09:14 OakHill wrote:
Remove unit selection completely, all units must be individually microd.
I'm starting to lose hope that people will ever stop recycling this joke.
|
*repost*
Most spells in Starcraft 1 are combat spells like psi storm, which is not used unless within active combat. In starcraft two a new set of spells that effects the economy (morphalisk) or is used outside of combat in general (spider mines) is an new and exciting path to different sorts of macro.
The advantage of spell-based macro is in the following:
1. The time intensity of macro (much player need to pay attention to base) can be tweaked by the amount of max energy/cooldown of the castors. To more max energy, the less the player need to pay attention to the castors before they overfill.
2. The strength of macro can be controlled by the power of the spells themselves.
3. The effect of macro is far more interesting if the spell castor have a wide pool of spells.
4. Spell effects can be made easily visible to an observer, more so than gateway utilization percentage.
5. The mechanism already exists in the game and does not require completely new concepts and engine changes.
6. Macro requirement can be made into a choice so players can use strategy that avoid using non-combat castors if they dislike macro.
Now, Concrete examples
I. Zerg
The Zerg Queen unit, being the manager of the hive clustor, is the unit that has non-combat spells. However, currently the spells don't really scale much and need to be modified a bit.
1. Give Hatchery Energy which acts like "shield battery for Queens" where it recharges Queen energy. Give it a low max energy of something like 50 max energy.
2. Queen will have abilities like morphalisk, swarm clutch, creep tumor, Transfusion, swarm infestation, deep tunnel. (all will cost more energy, adjusted for the now greater mana pool)
3. Allow extra Queens to be build upon hive tech, one queen per lair/hive building.
What this means is that Queens will have to constantly travel between hatchery to hatchery (tending the clustor) to get the most out of the energy from the hatchery. Since the spells varies in use, the use of the hatchery/queen energy will differentiate different strategy. This fits both the lore of the queen and gives adds strategy in both energy management, base layout and queen movement routes.
----
II. Terran
Terran have highly independent buildings so the Zerg model does not work. However, the Terran already have the Nomad, which is a non-combat castor and one simply need to make it accessible and vital to make macro an important part of the game.
1. Nomad no long require tech lab. However, detection is an upgrade at tech lab and will take energy. (like wraith cloak)
2. Auto-Turret will now take energy. Auto-Turret cost dropped.
3. Spider mine expire after 120 seconds. Spider mine activation range 6, hp 30 light.
4. Nomad max energy is 50. Gets upgraded to 150 after a long upgrade. (210 seconds)
What this means is that nomad will have to be constantly casting new defenses (every 50 seconds or less) to be fully efficient, as it can no longer accmulate a ton of energy. Now by making the nomad defenses strong, it would make the nomad an vital part of the slow push and base defense which fits the terran style while giving it an unique niche. The limitation on detection makes energy management more important and prevents swarms of Nomad nullifying cloaking.
Of course, Nomad is just one unit and within the terran arsonal there are other units that'd fit the role. In this case we call for the reaper which was considered lackluster previously.
1. Upgrade at armory of command detonated charges for the reaper. It will have linked cooldown with existing D-8 charges. It is cloaked and burrowed, has 10hp, does 20+20 damage upon command to detonate. It will take 15 seconds to arm. It does not track and will only hit units directly above it in a medium splash radius, and it has 1 sight range.
This means the reaper will have the additional role of maintaining map control and setting traps left and right like the old vulture. This is a spell that would likely be constantly used (it is free after all) and act as an aggressive APM sink. Bad players that lacks the APM will waste some mines while the cooldown finish.
-----
III.Protoss
Protoss lacks non-combat castors as it stands how, and its focused and well defined army means there is no obvious use to put the abilities onto. However the protoss psi matrix does offer lore justification for all sorts of abilities within a protoss base. Here is my tenative suggestion:
1. Nexus gains energy, capped at 40.
It gains the following spells:
"WarpTime": Accelerate the time of the single target, which includes everything from movement, attack, energy regen rates or build times (for buildings) by 30% by 60 seconds for 40 energy
"Channel": Can be used to transfer energy to other Nexus or mothership. Unlimited range.
"Cloaking field": Target a pylon within range. The pylon will than project a cloaking field for 1 energy per second after a initial cost of 20 energy.
2. Pylon gains ability "Drain" which converts its own shield to the energy of the Nexus (closest Nexus while under pylon field range) at the rate of 50 shield to 1 energy. It drains at the rate of 25 shield per second.
The abilities are researched at Templar Archives (WarpTime), Dark Obliesk (Cloaking Field).
Since warptime is so powerful, managing the energy is critical and good usage allows the protoss player to "hurry" buildings and bluff "hero units" and will constantly force the protoss player to get back to base to use this spell on whatever the strategic gap of the time.
|
1. ability to choose colors. i hate being purple. and teel, which is the opposite of leet.
2. show ping (like in counterstrike)
|
Vatican City State491 Posts
my idea would be a lack of replays for the first 6 months. this way people would not copy the strats THAT much and creative play would be anticipated. of course POVs and VODs would be made, but still they would not be that spread
look at starcraft "2fact" is now called cheese...
|
b.net features:
1) FRIEND FOLLOW!
2) await game. (instead of spamming join to see when new slots will open into a game, you "target" a game and it will join if a slot is available) it will help the players by joining as fast as possible. whats so great about that? you try to get friends into a game, but as soon as you boot a guy, another random guy joins. or you really want to download a ums map and end up missing out. or you keep spamming join, and hten get the blank screen for 10 seconds. it will also help b.net because it will reduce load on the servers from people spamming in this fashion. and if there are lots of people awaiting the same game, then a waitlist would be created. and if the game starts or host leaves before you can join, then it would notify the player that the game is gone or started. this can be done with a light, instead of a notification message. just need a way to notify the status in live time.
3) team melee "tweaked" mode. Theres a ums map called macro micro, which lets one player control the buildings and scv's while the other player gets control of the units. so it's like team melee, but not every player can control everything. (probably a good idea to allow scv's and shuttles to be controllabled by both players). also, it will probably end up being a 2v2 mode, since it is divided by units and buildings... but then u can always have multiple people in each roles i guess. if anyone has tried it, it's quite fun, and has its own flavor, disctinct from team melee. you feel more like a team, and there is less frustration, and bickering. a flavor i think is fun enough to merit it's own new game mode. capture hte flag, greed and a lot of other modes you see like 5 games on the game list. probably won't end up being competetive, but it's fun. and with more people being into competetive and intense side of starcraft, i think this mode has potential to be quite popular.
|
queen pheromone ability. this is kind of a salvage of the zerg caster buffing units. it would work in a small area around the queen that would give some kind of buff, whatever it may be. maybe it is kind of like warcraft and auras, but it's not as bad as people might first think it to be.
the queen is already somewhat of a hero unit. not strong, but unique for sure. this ability wouldn't cause too drastic imbalances, especially if it is kept out of early game, where there is the most danger of causing severe imbalances. the queen is qutie easily killed as we have been told. and the fact that you have to reupgrade everything and take the time to do so makes people use it defensively. but what about the exciting risk factor? if there are no reasonable offensive advantages, the queen will turn into a coward unit. even tho it is supposed to be a base guardian, it will do wonders for the experience of excitement if there was an incentive for people to venture the queen into front lines. i think it's worth testing. plus, even when the queen is defending, it's presence will help the defense,
|
Fast Mining
I've come to think to a very simple concept inspired from WC3 human / orc very early game, when you have to manually send workers to mine in order to increase their movement speed, thus gold mining rate. While you continually send them gathering gold you reach the maximal mining rate with 4 peons until the 5th completes your first building to relieve you.
An addition to SC2 workers could be the fast mining ability that would increase the amount of minerals they gather each time (from 5 to 8 for example) for 15 seconds. This ability could be triggered by just issuing them to a mineral patch manually.
It would be a very macro-oriented aspect of the game, since you could spend some time just macroing through your expands, ordering workers to mine, improving significantly your economy. It would also force you to choose between boosting mining rate and other tasks such as expanding, building, taking control of the map etc.
Auto-mining would then not be an issue anymore. Very fast players would be able to get insane amounts of money while microing and producing, and then would overwhelm their opponents.
What do you think ?
|
|
|
On September 05 2008 23:23 isuckalot wrote:
Fast Mining
I've come to think to a very simple concept inspired from WC3 human / orc very early game, when you have to manually send workers to mine in order to increase their movement speed, thus gold mining rate. While you continually send them gathering gold you reach the maximal mining rate with 4 peons until the 5th completes your first building to relieve you.
An addition to SC2 workers could be the fast mining ability that would increase the amount of minerals they gather each time (from 5 to 8 for example) for 15 seconds. This ability could be triggered by just issuing them to a mineral patch manually.
It would be a very macro-oriented aspect of the game, since you could spend some time just macroing through your expands, ordering workers to mine, improving significantly your economy. It would also force you to choose between boosting mining rate and other tasks such as expanding, building, taking control of the map etc.
Auto-mining would then not be an issue anymore. Very fast players would be able to get insane amounts of money while microing and producing, and then would overwhelm their opponents.
What do you think ?
sounds tedious and i would hate to be that overwhelmed opponent...
anyway that sounds kinda weird that the worker would only mine 8 on command and everytime he returns the 8 he goes back to mining 5 unless you tell him again to do it. but i don't see any reason why they couldn't do it. it doesn't seem realistic, at any rate. i guess if they gave the workers energy or something like that and made it cost energy then it might be realistic.
i'm sure you could make a custom game that does that with all the new triggers coming out for sc2, and i wouldn't be surprised if you could do something like that with wc3 triggers, although i'm sure it would be quite tricky.
but then i bet someone will edit your map and make it an autocast, lol.
anyway with the huge gas costs on the units with sc2 maybe they could try something like this for gas.
|
I haven't posted here in ages:
What they should do is give the medivac a 100 energy tranquilizer spray. It'll work like WCIII "Sleep" on biological units, i.e. unable to move or attack do anything for some time, if they take damage they wake up. It'll be short range AOE, maybe conal AOE.
Now what does this mean? The medivac has another use besides being a healing dropship. If a horde of ultraling is coming to mess up your drop, spray the ultra while your troops land and rape the lings. Need to run? Spray and get your troops inside. Gotta stop those zeals? Spray. Now obv it would have to be friendly fire too. But this could be an advantage, like if you want to prevent certain units from firing and giving away your position on a cliff for instance. This also means that you have a better way to defend against those pesky zealots charging into your tanks.
Weaknesses:
The 100 energy means that you have two sprays, tops, and that's energy that could have been used to heal instead. As a result, it may leave your troops with slow heals and that could be a big deal. On the other hand, you may be able to "sleep" lurkers and things like that before they tear apart your troops, or infesters in your base, or trap a nydus worm's cargo.
|
You should be able to upgrade pylons into shield batteries.
|
Vikings should be made in the factory and then go to the Starport individually for the flying upgrade.
However, each Viking should be much stronger to compensate for the time and micro involved into making a fully upgraded Viking.
|
I was just thinking that it would be pretty cool if the Zerg changeling could be controlled by both the player and the enemy team it is impersonating. That way they would have a harder time identifying it from their units.
It could either attack but not damage you OR not attack at all (making it easy to identify during combat, when your distracted by the war)
Since SC2 has unlimited unit selection there is little negative side effect on your enemy's micro because of it.
What do you think? :D
|
Death Ray
There would be an upgrade (300min/300gas) in the highest tier (the same as the mothership), that once completed would turn every nexus into a power generator, that would slowly gain energy up to 250 and would fill at the same rate as the casters energy in SC BW, Energy that would enable the motherships to fire a massive beam of inmense power in the ground beneath it. This would be done by selecting one nexus and one mothership and activating the ability, at that moment a light beam would originate from the nexus into the mothership that would then fire its deadly weapon.
The firing delay from the time you give the order to the moment when it fires would go from 1 second to 10 depending on the distance to the nexus.
The power and damage range of the blast would depend on how much energy the nexus had at the moment of firing, less than 50 would not even kill workers, around 150 it would be like 3/4 of a nuke, and at 250 it would just destroy everything on the screen. Also, the weapon would hit both friend and foe.
Plus, after using the weapon, the selected nexus would go inactive for 5 minutes (no resource gathering, worker production, no supply) but it would still gain energy.
|
On September 26 2008 09:00 EmeraldSparks wrote:
You should be able to upgrade pylons into shield batteries.
moon wells?
|
What I hope for is a see replay button in the endscreen so you sont have to create a new game to watch the replay you just have been playing..
|
I have an idea, wonder what people will think of it. Gonna use brood war examples to describe it, bear with me on this.
Let's say, for some reason, a zerg player has 6 defilers with plague and swarm researched. He's about to engage a player, and wants to plague the enemy army and set up dark swarms before he attacks. As it stands in brood war, he would have to clone the defilers in order to get them to do it relatively quickly so as to take advantage of the element of surprise.
My mechanic idea proposes the following improvement: instead of having to clone it, He could select all 6 defilers at once and set them as waypoints, shift-clicking all the plagues and swarms and achieving the same result. If you did this in BW, all 6 defilers would cast plague at the same spot. In this mechanic, only one plague would be cast at the first spot, then the next, then the next, then the swarms, so on and so forth, until all defilers were out of energy or the waypoint list ended.
If this doesn't make sense to you, start up broodwar and play protoss against a computer, and build up 12 dark archons with mind control. then walk into the enemy base with all 12 selected and start mind controlling. what happens is that because you can't cast mind control on your own units, only one mind control will be cast, saving the energy of the other dark archons.
Admittedly, this would make casting spells easier in general, but I think it would be an improvement to the game in general. thoughts?
|
Think they have smart casting in the current build, no?
|
On October 18 2008 10:20 afg-warrior wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2008 09:00 EmeraldSparks wrote:
You should be able to upgrade pylons into shield batteries. moon wells?
ENERGY PYLONZZ !!!
|
I'm not sure if this would be too much "automation" or what, so I wanted to gauge people's opinions on it. If it is already a feature (I haven't played SC2 yet), let me know and I'll delete this post.
Hotkey to attach Terran Add-ons in building's current location
I was just playing a TvZ with the destination wraith build, and I thought of a minor feature that might be useful in SC2. I was in his base with my 2 vultures, microing vs 8+ lings and some drones, and reached the level of 4 wraiths when I wanted to add-on the control tower to begin cloaking research. Unfortunately I'm not fast enough to press 1 (hotkey for starport), 1, c, then quickly line up the attachment with the building's current location, left click, then press 4 (hotkey of vultures), 4, and move the vultures before they died to the pursuing lings. Although one can make the argument that the current requirement to physically shift screen location back to the building and line up the attachment is a skill required to separate pros from newbs like me, it doesn't seem to line up across the races. Zerg can upgrade their existing infrastructure's tech (hatchery to lair; lair to hive; spire to greater spire) without returning to base, and in SC2 I believe so can protoss (gateway to warp gate). But terran must spend precious seconds away from their units in order to attach add-ons.
There is also the added inconvenience of attaching them in the wrong spot when in the heat of multitasking, which causes your building to lift off even before you can cancel. If even the most perfect starcraft player ever has done this to his command center in a live game, obviously everyone does it at times.
It doesn't matter what the hotkey is, as long as it is different from the hotkey to make the add-on (so an accidental double-tap doesn't start the add-on and cost you minerals). Pressing C (or whatever the add-on's hotkey is) brings up the usual translucent image of the building with the add-on, with the old option to cancel (esc), and a new one (say it's "u" for cUrrent location) to attach it where the building currently is. Obviously if there is a unit or building blocking it, you would get a warning similar to when you try to land on units/buildings/etc. But in my game, I could just have pressed 1, c, u, 4, and would be back to microing my vultures while the control tower built.
Let me know what you think. Does it newb the game down too much; is it a good idea; does it need refining; is it too insignificant to even discuss? I just felt it balanced one aspect of macro across the races: while every race requires you to return to your base to add new buildings, only terran requires you to return to your base to upgrade existing buildings.
|
United States3824 Posts
Pressing tab on a fac with an addon should switch to the addon.
|
i wonder if blizzard's listening.
anyway, i was thinking about a new unit.
this one comes from the factory replacing where once the viking used to be since now its in starport. this unit is like a moving bunker, a fast mobile, transportation unit on the ground.
it moves and shoots at the same time (like the scrapped cobra) and only loads biological units.
when loaded and when shooting it doesnt do the amount of damage the unit inside the vehicle does (like the bunker), but does the amount that the transporting vehicle does (since what the units inside are shooting with the gun mounted on the vehicle).
the amount of units able to fit in the vehicle is for blizzard to decide, also with the damage the vehicle does; all for balance purposes.
this vehicle also attacks like the bunker does, where if 2 units are inside the vehicle then both shoots at the same time.
each shot from each slot of the vehicle (say 4 units inside then 4 shots from 4 slots), do the amount of damage the vehicle suppost to do.
so say the vehicle does 8 damage, if 2 units go in then it does 16 damage.
it cannot attack on its own and needs at least one unit inside to fire.
but like the medivac though if the unit gets destroyed all the units inside it should be destroyed with it. so if ur quick enough you can take out ur units from the vehicle when highly damaged and about to get destroyed, so your units dont die with it.
the vehicle would unload just like the bunker (so all at once). this vehicle would probably have side doors or something? i dunno.
it also has a speed upgrade unlike the slow accelerating medivac.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I want to talk about the archon.
Opinions on wether it's a strong or weak unit in SC2 seem to vary (although slightly tilted towards bad I think), but that's not really what I want to talk about.
Ever since the original SC campaigns I'm sure there have been people who thought "well.. what would I get if I were to merge a DT with a HT instead?". In fact, in the map editor there's even a Zeratul/Tassadar hero (with no special traits, but still).
At first it looked like Blizzard was going to do something like this with the twilight archon, giving it feedback and making it morphable from HT+HT, DT+DT or DT+HT. However it has now lost its feedback ability and is back to a plain, old archon - a great unit, but a huge waste of potential for innovation (both in terms of lore and gameplay).
What I propose is something along these lines:
Twilight Archon
Siphon Mana - Like the spell of the Blood Mage in WC3, this ability was actually in SC2 (on the HT) a while back but was removed. It allows you to steal mana from an enemy unit and give to the Archon, OR give mana from the Archon, to a target allied unit.
Mana Shield - Might need a better name (Mind Shield ?), but this should be descriptive enough. When activated the Archon will take damage on his mana supply instead of his shield.
Initially I thought this would require the archon to have a pretty low mana supply, so as to not make this ability too strong - but a poster on the BNet forums came up with an elegant solution;
You wouldn't have to limit the energy to 100, all you would have to do is balance energy with less shields so:
SCI Archon = 350 shields, no energy
SC2 Twilight Archon = 150 shields, 200 energy
so it stays as a heavy assault unit as long as it doesn't use any of the abilities (besides the 'Energy shield' which is always on).... if it uses the abilities then it becomes weaker.
so if you have a group of Twilight Archons, some use their abilities (getting weaker) while others simply attack as normal
- Krikkitone on the Twilight Archon here
His ideas are pretty much what I was thinking actually, I like them (he has another post earlier in the thread as well, as do I).
Immolation - I'm not sure if this would be just too powerful, however I like the idea of the Archon lighting up and damaging everything around him.. It would work like the Immolation spell of the Demon Hunter in WC3 (and before someone goes "omg WC3 spells dont belong in SC2", blink is a WC3 spell - still want to use that argument?) but with some modifications.
Since the Archon really shouldn't be all powerful, I think you'd possibly have to have it drain both mana and shield.. Although, if the Archon when in caster mode has an already reduced shield capacity it might not be needed.
------
Anyway, these are just a couple of ideas I think could possibly make the Archon more interesting - if nothing else I think it should get to keep feedback/mana siphon, but I really like the idea of a Mana Shield.
There are actually a lot of very interesting spells from WC3 that I think could fit on this unit, another one that comes to mind is Spirit Link, an ability that links units together and distributes damage dealt to one of them across all linked units. It certainly makes sense from a lore standpoint for the protoss.
If I'm not the only one who feels this way about the Archon I might make a thread out of this post, but we'll see.
|
I think Immolation could be a passive ability albeit weaker than DH's Immolation.
And I like the Spirit Link-like spell a lot more than the Siphon Mana one. Maybe make it so that the damage is not spread across those units but rather dealt to the Archon itself. This ability would be futher augumented by the Mana Shield thing, making Archon a strong tank unit.
I'm going to post my revised/overhauled suggestions for Thor and the gas mechanic below.
I. Thor replacement.
I believe Thor is quite a misfit when it comes to the Terran arsenal. It's uninsipred just like the MotherShip, is constantly being reworked, yet it always overlaps with different units' roles or is rather useless.
Basic characteristics:
- above average HP
- about as mobile as Goliaths in BW
- no attack at all by default
- rather high up the tech tree
- quite high base armor
Seismic Thumper (deployable like the Siege Mode of the Siege Tank) - allows the Thor to deploy into a Seismic Thumper; Thor in the Seismic Thumper's mode cannot use any weapons but using D-Matrix is possible (neither GtA nor melee), it slows the enemy ground units down and makes Zerg units unable to burrow and forces the already burrowed units to unburrow. | two different models: deployed & undeployed
1. Upgrades per unit (cost resources; only one can be acquired by a single Thor, as in they are mutually exclusive):
A. Melee Combat Kit - equips the Thor with Combat Chainsaws (Warhammer style; good vs armored type of units) and (if researched) Defensive Matrix Core (gives the Thor temporary 300 or so extra HP against ranged units; the Thor is equipped with a single D-Matrix charge - similarly to how Vultures have only three Spider Mines). costs resources and time to upgrade (during which the Thor is immobile similarly to Zerg units morphing) | model differences (two models: with & without the D-Matrix charge)
B. Missile Battery - equips the Thor with a Valkyrie-like AoE GtA attack; long range. costs resources time to upgrade (during which the Thor is immobile similarly to Zerg units morphing) | model differences
DISCLAIMER: Customized Thor (with either Melee Combat Kit or Missile Battery) can still deploy into the Seismic Thumper.
2. Global upgrades:
Defensive Matrix Core - adds Defensive Matrix Core to the Melee Combat Kit; researched in Armory.
Role:
The Thor would be an ideal choice for augmenting the infamouse Terran Push, making the enemies regret they've ever engaged the Terran army. Decent base armor (capable of getting even better with upgrades), above average HP, and melee attack make him a decent tanking unit capable of breaking stalemates or well defended spots. The D-Matrix charge would have to be used in a timely manner (allowing some last second saves) - using it prematurely can be the difference between winning and losing the game.
The Thor would be a suitable unit to compliment both: metal & bionic armies. Seismic Thumper mode combined with well placed Spider Mines would render any flanks a lot less lethal (especially Charging Zealots or unable to burrow Lurkers), forcing the enemy to snipe the deployed Thors beforehand.
Well positioned Seismic Thumpers could help defending choke points or any defensive positions for that matter. They'd force Infestors to unburrow, rendering sneaky Fungal Infestation raids impossible. Additionally, they'd be very useful in warding off Lurkers guarding ramps leading to expansions, which would compensate for the lack of Irradiate.
Following the Missile Battery path will make your Thors formidable enemies for the enemy airborne units.
In conclusion, Thor would be a formidable tanking unit or a good anti-air one, depending on what customization path the player chooses for his Thors, twhichaddresses the issues raised by many regarding Terran being allegedly the least innovative of the three races by capitalizing on the customization theme within the Terran race (add-ons, BC upgrades, Viking to a degree, Bunkers, etc.). It also addresses the concern of Terran currently not having any melee units, too. You could improve its tanking capabilites by researching the armor upgrades and upgrading the Defensive Matrix Core or e.g. use him mainly as a support unit in form of the Seismic Thumper.
II. The gas mechanic:
Each geyser starts at 50% (subject to balance) of its maximal capacity. There are three mining modes. You can reach its full capacity by using mode III. If the geyser gets depleted before it reaches its full capacity it's depeleted (say you depleted it in mode I, it started with 50%, which is 2500 - you won't get the other 2500 back).
The Refinery (or Assimilator/Extractor) modes:
Mode I - the standard mode (all Refineries start with that mode on) - up to 3 workers can mine; each worker mines 5 gas units per turn.
Mode II (requires the player to switch to this mode) - allows up to 5 workers to mine (workers spend less time in the Refinery); each worker mines 7 (subject to balance) gas units per turn but the player only gains 5 (it depletes the geyser by 2 units more than you are credited with); useful for fast tech or hanbang strategies, etc.
Mode III (requires the player to switch to this mode) - does not allow any workers to mine; the Refinery reaches its full capacity over time (let's say it starts with 2500 gas and reaches 5000 mark over a minute or whatever).
DISCLAIMER: If the Refinery depletes before it's reached its full capacity, there's no going back (e.g. you've mined those 2500 gas units and never switched to mode III - you're not going to be able to mine those "remaining" 2500 gas units).
This way there'd be plenty more openings. You'd have to manage you gas timing/mode switching (including even 3rd or 4th gas expansions, not just mains.naturals) well in order to get the most out of your strategy/build order.
Additional info:
- as oposed to the Blizzard gas mechanic does not require each and every map to have two geysers in every main/natural - it allows for far more map designs than BW's resource system, imo
- some geysers could start at 0 initial gas count (forcing you to set them to mode III immediately after you take them) to make you plan your economic growth and take them ahead of time
- mode III allows for power-teching
|
Starcraft 2 with Ingame korean commentating similar to that of Madden or NBA Live
how sick would that be, maybe even if its just select words........ that would be awesome
|
On November 23 2008 11:05 Sadist wrote:
Starcraft 2 with Ingame korean commentating similar to that of Madden or NBA Live
how sick would that be, maybe even if its just select words........ that would be awesome
yaa that wold be so amazing!
|
Mana Shield - Might need a better name (Mind Shield ?), but this should be descriptive enough. When activated the Archon will take damage on his mana supply instead of his shield.
Initially I thought this would require the archon to have a pretty low mana supply, so as to not make this ability too strong - but a poster on the BNet forums came up with an elegant solution;
You wouldn't have to limit the energy to 100, all you would have to do is balance energy with less shields so:
SCI Archon = 350 shields, no energy
SC2 Twilight Archon = 150 shields, 200 energy
so it stays as a heavy assault unit as long as it doesn't use any of the abilities (besides the 'Energy shield' which is always on).... if it uses the abilities then it becomes weaker.
so if you have a group of Twilight Archons, some use their abilities (getting weaker) while others simply attack as normal.
This would mean that Twilight Archons regain "shields" at twice the standard rate, correct?
+1 energy and +1 shield.
|
hey yeah, the siphon mana thing is a little too much, though. means you could have invincible archons with a little micro. though that would mean that you have to wait like 3 and a half minutes to get archons up to their full sheild level.
I like the idea, would make archons more of a flexible unit. could even become like a second backbone unit like the stalker.
|
Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but allowing in game observers to be able to follow a player's first person view would be really cool.
|
Not sure if this has been mentioned be4 but why not implement Autobuy/Infinite Unit Queue without costing money for each unit after teh first one, it can be set off tho.
Thus players can focus more on strategy T.T isnt this part of this so called evolution?
|
This may have already been suggested but for trading resources between players why not have all trade amounts trickle into the receiving party's pockets rather than be transfered instantaneously? With play-testing this could be balanced to counter problems with early game imbalances while retaining late game usefulness.
The rate could be based on resources/second or percent/second. To avoid artificial rates all resources would have to be drained the moment of the trade. This means that if your team is going to trade between one another, then for the length of the transaction time some of your team's collective resources are unusable.
|
On November 12 2008 03:42 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I want to talk about the archon.
[rest of the post omitted]
Yeah, immolation definitely fits archon. I remember, archons had ability that makes them deal double damage on their first attack, no? Even if blizz thought about giving them some very powerful ability, than it surely viable
I wanna play a bit on your concept, though. I hope you don't mind ;P
"We need focus!.."
Conceptually, this energy cloud that surrounds Archon is both his Shield and Mana. He manipulates this cloud to attack his enemies and once in a while, when the energy becomes especially tense and obstinate he releases it, which in effect literally melts everything that happens to be nearby.
Now, how it could be implemented.
Twilight Archon
"We burn!.."
Stats:
10 hp
250 energy (i.e. shied)
If his energy is lower than 250 it will regenerate until it's 250 points again, just like the rest of the protoss.
If it's higher than 250 it will decrease until it's 250 points again.
energy limit: 500.
Siphon Mana:
AoE spell that takes up to 200 energy points (that is, both mana and shields) from any unit inside the area, including your own units, and gives it to the caster. Doesn't cost energy, but has delay after cast
This energy is divided among targets, i.e.: if there's only 1 infestor with full mana points, he will lose 200 points; if there are 3 medievacs it will drain 67 mana points from each of them; if there's 10 protoss units, it will take 20 shield points from each of them (if they have any, of course).
Energy Burn / Energy Outburst / Immolation (whatever fits better):
For the cost of 300 energy points deals vast amount of damage around the caster
All I can say, it should be bigger than 3x damage of his regular attack.
Trivia:
- First of, the fact that Siphon Mana works on your own regular units makes it both interesting and tricky to use
- Siphon Mana is reminiscent of EMP (or even EMP + reverse shield battery), but EMP is gone so it's fine.
- If we gonna make Energy Burn very powerful, we should also somewhat mark visually archons that have enough energy to cast it, so opponent can better adapt to it. Dark Archon from Brood War can be utilized for that, that is, if Archon has more than 300 energy he would change his color to red :3 That makes sense! ;P
|
I'll preface this by saying that I have spent about 15 minutes scanning through every post in this thread, but I'm not particularly interested in new unit ideas etc so I haven't read these in depth. Apologies if this has already been posted and I've missed it.
Macro Mechanic Suggestion:
My suggestion is that each production building (thinking Terran and Protoss here) have its own stockpile of resources, which will need to be replenished periodically by the player to ensure a smooth production flow. Perhaps the player would need to assign a worker to a "supply run" between a nearby supply depot or pylon and a production building.
Catch is that - depending on the distance between the supply structure (depot/pylon) and the production building, the worker will tend to restock too fast unless manually toggled between production buildings at appropriate intervals.
I don't pretend to have thought through all the possible negative implications, but I can see a potential "logical" flaw in that these workers would need to carry significantly more to the buildings on each run than they do on a mining run.
Perhaps it could be made noob-friendly by having the SCV that finishes the building automatically and immediately start a supply run to that building.
Edit: god, upon reflection this looks awful o.o I think I'll stick to playing.
|
Colossus:
Make it behave exactly as now, just give it another ability:
Old scarabs! Just limit it to 1 scarab per colossi (Upgraded to 2?) and it do not fire them automatically, its an ability to fire. Also since its in a much stronger vessel etc the scarabs costs ~25 minerals +~25 gas now and take much longer to build.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 26 2008 02:35 SassO wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2008 11:05 Sadist wrote:
Starcraft 2 with Ingame korean commentating similar to that of Madden or NBA Live
how sick would that be, maybe even if its just select words........ that would be awesome yaa that wold be so amazing!
Haha I agree wholeheartedly Hopefully Blizzard does too, they could make it an easter egg or something.
"Plaaaaaaaguuuuuuuuuuu"
@InRaged, I love the idea of being able to "overcharge" the Archon's mana! I'm unsure how I feel about the other two spells but I'm almost sure I'd prefer that version of the archon to the current one
|
On December 04 2008 02:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2008 02:35 SassO wrote:On November 23 2008 11:05 Sadist wrote:
Starcraft 2 with Ingame korean commentating similar to that of Madden or NBA Live
how sick would that be, maybe even if its just select words........ that would be awesome yaa that wold be so amazing! Haha I agree wholeheartedly Hopefully Blizzard does too, they could make it an easter egg or something. "Plaaaaaaaguuuuuuuuuuu" @InRaged, I love the idea of being able to "overcharge" the Archon's mana! I'm unsure how I feel about the other two spells but I'm almost sure I'd prefer that version of the archon to the current one
agree'd about the archon part! haha
|
One recent idea I had was a Protoss 'deflector' unit that would be a hard counter against range units. The deflector would be a slow-moving mid-game ground unit with no weapons of its own, but would have the ability to deflect ranged damage fired upon itself towards the nearest ground/air unit up to a limited distance (say, half the range of a siege tank). The unit would be very difficult to use effectively, but there are many quirks that could lead to interesting play:
1) An early mutalisk harass could be countered by the deflector if it was correctly positioned near the location being attacked. Mutalisks would be vulnerable since their attacks could unintentionally ricochet onto the deflector. Defending units with ranged ground attack could also attack the deflectors and have their shots ricochet up to attacking air units. Cannons could even extend their range by attacking deflectors positioned closer to the attacking air units.
2) Any mass marine/hydra push could be temporarily halted if deflectors successfully block ramp/access to base.
3) Tank pushes would have an interesting change of strategy with deflectors on the field. The Protoss army would want to be a good distance away from its own deflectors so it would not receive the ricocheted siege tank damage, but if they stayed too far away then the Terran could launch a melee assault on the deflectors to take them out. There would be additional micro involved with stopping the tanks from auto-firing on the deflectors if they get close enough to deflect back the damage. This would lead to lots of pivotal moments where attacking could suddenly switch from beneficial to harmful for either race.
4) A line of deflectors could be organized to deflect attacks in a chain-like manner. There would have to be a limit to the number of deflections possible, but it would be interesting to see this used. This would take a lot of skill to perform properly, and there is plenty of room for this to backfire.
The deflector could have its ability as always passive, immobile when activated (like siege tank), or have it limited to a Psi counter similar to the wraith's cloak. The deflections could hit friendly or enemy units, but could slightly favor attacking enemy units if that tweaking was necessary to make it an effective unit.
I think this unit would add to gameplay because it allows for a normally disadvantaged mix of units to fight successfully against a superior group if certain conditions in micro are performed properly. It also allows for for the transfer of damage between normally unaccessible dimensions of battle (ranged ground-only units being able to hit air units via deflector). This type of counter-intuitive feature mirrors the many hidden tricks in SC that have been revealed after years of pro-play: archons friendly-firing so splash damage can kill cloaked units, etc. The last reason deflectors would add to gameplay is the fact that the unit's ability could potentially be used for the opponent's benefit. This is similar to spider mine placements hurting Terran, general force positioning, baiting, and splash damage.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Just a quick idea that randomly came to me; should terran addons be able to lift-off themselves? I say this because many people talk about how the new addon system can allow you to switch tech faster (ie if you have a reactor addon for your rax but you want to switch to metal, you can land the fac next to the reactor and it will still work).
However, at least in SC, buildings are kinda clumsy and it's a hassle to fly them around (imo). + It'd allow for cool building floats :D
|
On December 04 2008 21:11 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Just a quick idea that randomly came to me; should terran addons be able to lift-off themselves? I say this because many people talk about how the new addon system can allow you to switch tech faster (ie if you have a reactor addon for your rax but you want to switch to metal, you can land the fac next to the reactor and it will still work).
However, at least in SC, buildings are kinda clumsy and it's a hassle to fly them around (imo). + It'd allow for cool building floats :D
Imagine using that to create large floating walls following your siege tanks around and then deploying for combat!
That way you could wall your enemy into his own base np!
|
Talking about that twilight archon unit, the name inspired me to the following idea:
Regardless of abilities and other configuration, it would be cool if this unit would be completely invisible when standing idle. Not even detectors could see it. Then when it does anything, it will become normally visible. Of course regaining complete invisiblity when returning to idle would need a 'cooldown'.
This would open up some strategies with ambushing or other surprises.. perhaps a twilight archon would be too costly a unit making related strategies not feasible. But the concept could be applied to any unit, but it would fit a twilight archon, lore wise.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think normal invisiblity would be enough haha ;P
It'd be kinda meh if it could just cloak at 5 hp and NOTHING could detect, then decloak when full shield.
|
You have a point there FrozenArbiter.. Let's refine:
A cooldown to turn undetectable is necessary. When being attacked, it will stay normal for a while longer. So this makes it possible to chase them down. To become undetectable, they'd have to be sitting silent without being attacked for a certain amount of time. say, 8 seconds? Perhaps they could become cloaked after 2 seconds of being completely idle, as an intermediate step... balance dependent.
If this is unusable in regular starcraft II, at least let us map edit it in :-D then we'll see at any point later if it can be a strategy / tactics element. (I guess this last remark can be appended to every item on this wish list thread hehe)
|
On December 05 2008 00:17 Badjas wrote:
Talking about that twilight archon unit, the name inspired me to the following idea:
Regardless of abilities and other configuration, it would be cool if this unit would be completely invisible when standing idle. Not even detectors could see it. Then when it does anything, it will become normally visible. Of course regaining complete invisiblity when returning to idle would need a 'cooldown'.
This would open up some strategies with ambushing or other surprises.. perhaps a twilight archon would be too costly a unit making related strategies not feasible. But the concept could be applied to any unit, but it would fit a twilight archon, lore wise.
So I just wall him into his base with a couple of these, and he can never get out with ground units? Or I put one at every expo and he can never expand? Sounds a bit imba to me...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Hehe, I'm not a fan of perma-cloak but those issues could be solved by having them have 0 collision size while in that state. They could be in some other dimension or something.
I don't really love the idea (it just seems a bit weird to be completely undetectable..) but I don't think those are things that'd stop it from working
Speaking of the map editor, I hope you are able to really go nuts in terms of what you can add to a melee map. As an example, the WC3 map Centaur Grove has 2 warp-gates which can take you across the map - I hope we'll see such things in SC2 maps as well (hell, I think we should be able to place areas with faster healing or faster mana regeneration etc in melee maps). And yes, I realize this is probably a turn around from whatever I used to think over a year ago when SC2 was just announced ;o
Freedom is good, if it doesn't work, nobody will put it in maps.
And before I sleep I have to - yet again - profess my love for the Demon unit from Armies of Exigo. It has a teleport spell which can take it anywhere on the map (travel time varies depending on how far you go) and it's *amazing*.
Please, please, please, please, pleaaaaaaaaaaase give this ability to either terran (the thor, should probably be a lift-off animation instead of teleport tho) or protoss (the archon). (Don't give it to the zerg because I don't want to have to play zerg and this ability would seriously force me to)
|
How about a destroyable neutral Xel-Naga building that cloaks your units in a certain radius when there's a psi unit nearby? ;]
|
Nydus Worm Tragedy
Upon reading FE article some time ago and now again after recalling that Nydus Worm is the only Zerg transport, it come to me: isn’t any try to balance it is nothing else but Sisyphean toil?
Think about it, what role should Nydus Worm have? Firstly, it should be this mighty web of tunnels that allows the player to relocate Zerg’s numerous forces anywhere in no time. At the same time Nydus Worm should be cheap and relatively early available transport that the Zerg can use to take island expansions; preferably It should be as early as possible – without both transport and any cliff jumping capabilities Zerg’s early-mid game will be vastly inferior in its dynamics to the other races. In nutshell, first role is a deadly beast and second role – an obedient copy-boy.
Indeed it’s hard to balance Nydus Worm – roles it should take are contradicting in many ways and without significant conceptual changes there’s simply no way to make Nydus Worm balanced at both of them. Either former or later role won’t be anywhere as viable as we wish it, or both of the roles average in the state of apathetic irrelevance and that’s unacceptable.
Limiter of Zerg’s detection
Why there was suddenly a need to have Nydus Worm as the only Zerg’s transport? Because the only other natural for the Zerg transport – the Overlord – overlaps way too much with new more dynamic Nydus Worm concept. However, I want to argue that rebalancing Overlord as a minor transport is much more worthy of time: not only that’s much easier, but this way we also won’t carelessly sacrifice such important aspects as an early game diversity and the drop-based micro (the Roach is a great candidate for such micro, try to figure out why ).
Let’s put aside Nydus Worm and his troubles for the moment. I ask you to remember why has been introduced Overseer. It has been brought to limit Zerg’s detection capability, and it does limit it – no doubts about that. What would happen, though, if we give Overseer an inborn transportation ability?
Would happen same thing that happened with detection – Zerg’s transportation will be considerably more expensive than it was before. And what if we cut twice Overseer’s capacity, so it could carry only 1 ultra/lurker or 4 zerglings/drones? Overseer as a transport will become much less effective and barely suitable for any sort of mass drops. That’s exactly what we need. Consider now one important point: with or without ability to transport, morphing at least some overlords into overseers always makes sense - you need detection, speed upgrade makes Overseer better scout and finally it can spawn creep. Hence, when we are granting transportation ability to the Overseer, which works without any additional upgrades, we’re essential giving it to the Zerg for free. Very weak and very ineffective ability, but free, nonetheless, and the player will definitely use it for the very basic drops.
Overlord versus Overseer
But now, when Overseer has so many pluses, what will prevent the player from morphing all his Overlords into Overseers and later use them for mass drops anyway? Remember, Overseer can’t be expensive – it’s the only Zerg’s mobile detector. We need to give the player a very good reason not to use Overseers for mass drops. Or very good reason not to morph all of the Overlords into Overseers, and for that, I suggest making Overlord the only unit... that can call Nydus Worm! Seems like a good reason not to ever mass drop with Overseers when there is much cheaper and much more suitable transport right on tap. Besides, Overlord’s very low speed makes Nydus Worm less prone to abuses discussed in the FE article, afterall it's much easier to scout and kill slow unit, than fast one. It’s way too slow for my likes, though.
Faster Overlord
If we are going to force the player to use Overlord throughout the whole game for any reason, be it Nydus Worm or something else, we’ve got to make it a bit faster (i.e. similar to Guardian’s speed from the Brood War), since playing with such slow unit is nothing else but frustration, in my opinion. While we can up Overseer’s speed without big consequences, we can’t do same for Overlord for obvious reasons. The only way to up Overlord’s speed is to make some sort of middle-game upgrade, but we can do much better than that. We can boost Overlord’s speed at the same time the player gets Nydus Worm. That is, the very building/upgrade that makes Nydus Worm available also, as a free bonus, will boost speed of all Overlords. That’s really elegant solution since it will also serve as a giveaway for the opponent of the Nydus Worm timing!
That may seem such small changes don't deserve such long essay, but they're misleadingly small. Not to mention, if I just posted "Give overlord back his transportation!" no one would take me seriously :3
|
Oh, shoot me, I forgot to post the change for Nydus Worm itself, lol... Sorry for the double post, I’ll try to make it short this time around -___-
Ok, like I said, Overlord is really good place for Nydus Worm because its slowness makes Nydus Worm less prone to abuses described by Chill/Idra. At the same time obviously, Overlord’s speed makes Nydus Worm much less dynamic and we don’t want that. To make it more dynamic we should make Overlord more mobile.
We need Overlord to be slow, but mobile. o.o
There is one way to do so.
We need to allow every single unit, including air ones, to travel through Nydus Worm. That sounds crazy, but that’s exactly the reason why I like it. And it makes sense lore wise, imho.
To balance out such power Nydus Worm has to be very fragile, so Zerg’s opponent would be able to easily shut it down with small force of reapers or stalkers. Also Nydus Worm has to be relatively cheap and very fast to build – we need to encourage the Zerg player to constantly "reopen" closed exits.
Now what’s the use of the “Spawn Creep” ability and its speed bonus in mid-late game when there’s much more useful Nydus Worm? Not so many uses. To fix it and to further balance Nydus Worm, let’s tie them up together. Let’s forbid to call for Nydus Worm outside of the creep. If the creep’s gone Nydus Worm will die just like other Zerg’s buildings. So if the player needs Nydus Worm far from his base he’ll need to spawn creep there first with Overseer and make sure that it stays once Overlord comes and calls for Nydus Worm. Also, this way Zerg’s opponent will get another mean to kill Nydus Worm – by killing source of the creep.
|
"6. Zerg has cliff-scaling units? – Scumlord (USEast)
We want to keep three races different and they do not necessarily have the same ability units. Currently Zerg do not have a cliff-scaling unit, like the Reaper in Terran or Colossus in Protoss. However, Zerg still can expand very quickly and have other movement advantages like 30% additional speed on creep. They also have the combination of Overlord’s creep generating ability and Nydus Network as a very powerful tool to attack opponent’s main base or expansion. Also, Overlords are currently able to transport Zerg units like the original StarCraft. " - Q&A 47
^_____________^
|
Thought of an early game defense as terran.
Build your first depot in your mineral line so that it 'manner blocks' a spot for a mineral or two. Burrow it when its done.
Now if the zerg or toss rushes and you are caught off guard, you can stack all your scv behind the burrow depot and lift it so they can't target workers while you deal with the threat.
|
Relating to the first page of this, I have to say I like early-game resource-sharing because it opens up a whole lot more opportunities in 2v2 starcraft than it does in wc3 (in wc3 it is basically just to help them rebuild or give them some gold when you have too much to spend). In starcraft common build orders and strats could evolve from giving an early 100 minerals to a player and it would make a big difference.
With the overlord/overseer thing, why not just keep the nydus worm for army transport and make it so that the overlords can only transport drones and no other units. This kinda makes sense because the drones might be seen as something comparable to larvae in real-life insects, which are carried around often by other members of the colony or nest or whatever.
|
I don't know the status of MBS, but what about making MBS a late-game expensive upgrade?
(sorry if this has already been posted)
|
On February 08 2009 05:06 Intervigilium wrote:
I don't know the status of MBS, but what about making MBS a late-game expensive upgrade?
(sorry if this has already been posted)
I think I posted something like this before but it was shot down. I don't remember why, but the argument was convincing enough for me to abandon the idea altogether.
|
terrans should have like one normal siege tank and one like super siege tank that is more powerful but cost more
|
This is a very small idea...
At your main, instead of having just blue minerals, there should be a mixture of blue and yellow minerals. You can send all your units to automine, but if you split correctly you can yield a slightly better result.
I thought it would help define the line between noobs and pros and whatnot~
|
i got a small idea that might be crap but oh well i want to share it with someone:
Ok, so the queen can create creep tumors, and I guess supposedly a good zerg player will have a lot of creep tumors around to make a nice "creep highway". Well I was thinking about how in SC1 a strategy a lot of Zs will do vs protoss when going 5 hat hydra is to morph some hydras into lurkers in the middle of a battle or while retreating (or even to block a ramp) and they basically sort of act as a meat shield, soaking up a lot of hits. So what if you could uproot a creep tremor and have them move around(or maybe not move around, I dunno), and activate an ability to go into a big "shell" that basically just acts like a D-matrixed lurker egg or something, that a lot of units will auto-attack, and the opposing player will need to "micro" (lol) his units to not attack it, or waste a lot of shots shooting at it.
Maybe a good way to do it is a creep tumor can either be burrowed and spreading creep, or unburrowed and in a shell(immobile).
It would be good for when you're under attack (or maybe fall back to a "defensive position" that is just a bunch of creep tumors) and you can use them to add to the total HP of your army, especially in the mid game since lurkers are now hive-tech and you can't try to pull the same shenanigans as freely with lurker eggs.
I always sort of had the idea of a big zerg unit that had a shell or something and soaked up a lot of hits but didn't really do any damage, the creep tumor seems like it could be a good candidate for a mechanic such as that.
eh? eehhhhh???
|
When a unit reaches 25 kills, it should turn into a hero unit...
Using Jim Raynor in a game would be fun...
|
On February 19 2009 13:18 LunarDestiny wrote:
When a unit reaches 25 kills, it should turn into a hero unit...
Using Jim Raynor in a game would be fun...
lol fuck off, this isn't C&C. (Unless you mean just the textual rank changes and doesn't effect gameplay)
|
United States7166 Posts
For spectators it is a very enjoyable part of the game to see those reavers with 30+ kills, or archons/DTs/HTs etc
It would be pretty sweet to see some kind of change in text, icon, or even graphical change to units that get many kills, without changing the gameplay. Perhaps this should be seen by spectators only, and in which case they could do even more with this.. for instance showing how many kills a storm drop got appearing for a short time somewhere on the screen.
|
I'm sorry if these ideas have been posted already, or if they are already in the game. There are too many Starcraft II websites for a single person to scan through. Here's the deal.
As far as I know, in Starcraft II you will be able to select any number of units and not just 12. I think the hotkeys used for building these units should still apply, so if you've selected 50 odd units, you can press z and be controlling only the zerglings, or d for all the drones etc. This will help when managing a cluttered rally point.
Secondly, I think it would be very cool if for instance zerglings could jump DOWN from high ground but not climb back up. This could either be automatic or a toggled action, like attack+move only it's jump+move. It would help zerg defend their base (if it's on high ground) by providing the opportunity for a flank.
I realise this might be imba on maps where your base is on low ground next to cliffs, so if deemed necessary it could instead be an upgrade. If so, it could apply to more units than just the zergling, or the roach. I think it would be a very cool visual to have 20+ zerglings jumping down on a group of marines in a valley. :D
|
Sweden33719 Posts
@Ideas - I like it!
@Zelniq - M-m-m-m-m-monster kill!
@Scope - that's an interesting idea actually! However, SC2 will already have the Tab key for toggling between subgroups of units, so it might not be needed?
When the Hellion was first announced, I'm pretty sure I was one of the people complaining about how the Vulture had been replaced by something inferior, and how the downgrade from hoverbike to buggy didn't make any sort of sense.
Well, it's grown on me.
Grown, but still not quite perfect. What bothers me is that they took the very versatile Vulture, with it's fairly unique mines (and dazzling speed) and replaced it with.. A firebat on wheels with no other qualities?
Let's look at the Hellion's stats:
Life: 90
Minerals: 100
Supply: 2
Build Time: 30
Hotkey: E
Produced from: Factory
Upgrades: High Capacity Barrels, Vehicle Plating, Vehicle Weapons
(From: http://www.sc2armory.com/game/terran/units/hellion/)
The upgrade doubles the Hellions attack range (according to: http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Hellion)
Seems pretty much like a slightly stronger Vulture, which is fine. But it needs a special ability imo. Giving it mines would be problematic, as the Reaper already has a similiar role and its own brand of bombs, and the Nighthawk (last I checked) currently has the regular mines.
So mines are out - how about this:
Turbo Boost
Upgrades from reactor (or wherever)
* Allows Buggy (buggy is so much cuter than Hellion) to temporarily increase it's speed by X. Sort of like an afterburner in other words.
I'm not sure how fast it is by default (the wikia link says it's faster than a reaper, so decently fast I suppose), but if this just makes it too fast (ie it can easily chase and kill anything), then you could easily add drawbacks, such as making them do X% damage less while boosting.
Why?
Because it's cool and I can't believe no SC/SC2 unit has this ability!
If anyone has any more ideas/like this idea, I might make a consolidated thread later, but for nowI just want to get this out there. So it's kind of a beta test!
Wroom wroom =]
|
On March 04 2009 09:29 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Turbo Boost
Upgrades from reactor (or wherever)
* Allows Buggy (buggy is so much cuter than Hellion) to temporarily increase it's speed by X. Sort of like an afterburner in other words.
I'm not sure how fast it is by default (the wikia link says it's faster than a reaper, so decently fast I suppose), but if this just makes it too fast (ie it can easily chase and kill anything), then you could easily add drawbacks, such as making them do X% damage less while boosting.
Why?
Because it's cool and I can't believe no SC/SC2 unit has this ability!
If anyone has any more ideas/like this idea, I might make a consolidated thread later, but for nowI just want to get this out there. So it's kind of a beta test!
Wroom wroom =]
Or maybe make it harder to control when it's turboboosted..., kind of like in racing games when you have really high sensitivity. I'm not sure how you would implement this though, but it could probably work along the lines of acceleration in current StarCraft units. So this would leave a lot of room for cool physics effects that would be useful for micro (like muta micro).
Anyway, I like the idea.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Yes, I thought about that as well - I wasn't sure how to implement it either tho
|
Hello, I'm new to the forums and relatively new to Star craft. I realize its far too late to get into Star Craft one, so I am planning on trying to become an avid Star Craft 2 player. I have a proposed theory.
Being new I am welcome to any advice/criticism why this idea will or will not work.
Proposed strategy:
Name: Planetary Fortress Slow Rush
disclaimer: Due to not knowing supply rates/speeds etc i won't go into when to build
Step 1- After initial expansion, and possible defense against first rush, better yet during a big attack or push build 2 to 3 command centers.
Step 2 -With attacking strong attacking ground force move command centers behind attacking units and convert to planetary fortress mode.
Step 3-After enemy base (expansion) is decimated (probably will not work on a main until late game) leave command centers there to pillage new found resources.
Optional step 4 - Call down mules to increase production
step 5 - Create more Command Centers to repeat Steps 1 through 3.
Possible Weaknesses:
1 Zerg infestation - could end up with corrupt corrupt Command Centers. This would be counter productive to the push/ game possibly game breaking on a failed attempt. Strategy may be more sound against Terran and Protoss. Could likely be hard countered by Zerg late game early on could be good against them.
2. May be resource/time intensive - better to compliment this strategy with strong anti anti-air and mules
Pluses + :
1. Increased aid to base raids.
2. Instant resource harvesting, saves SCV time to build new Command center.
3 . Better protection for new acquisitions. One command center harvests the other one or two defend.
Well what do ya think? Open to suggestions.
|
|
|
Wait, you mean that they can't change back. If that's the case then never mind. Thanks for the welcome and heads up. I look forward to SC2 and discussing theory and such with the pros.
|
@FrozenArbiter:
Hmm maybe you could have a right click apply a force in a direction, rather than changing movement directly in that direction. This basically means that you'd have to turn a lot earlier than you expect to turn, kind of like with controlling shuttles (slow acceleration). Maybe correlate the acceleration with the number of times you click, so if you click repeatedly, it'll accelerate faster towards a direction (all of this within a capped max speed, of course). I don't know. It'll have to be tweaked. It has to feel like it's harder to control because of the immense speed, but still intuitive to control.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Yeah that sounds like a good solution
|
@frozenArbiter
The thing about tabbing between subgroups is that it's only for ease of access to special abilites really. if you issue a move order, it doesn't matter which subgroup is selected, everything selected that can move, will. Still having the same hotkeys as for unit building apply for unit selection would let you drag a box over your drone line, press z, and get those pesky two zerglings in there selected so you can move them somewhere else, without having to click them individually, either on the HUD or on the screen.
How do you people like the idea of zerglings jumping down cliffs?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Hm in WC3 couldn't you hold down some key to make only the units of the subgroup do that action? I could swear I heard that somewhere ;o
Only problem with your idea tho, is that there's gonna be overlap with abilities and unit names.. IE ok you press S to build scourges but S is also stop. Etc.
|
I'm relatively new to Star Craft, but one thing unit that I wish the Terrans had would be a marine melee unit that could go toe to toe with zealots, zerglings, and Hydrolisks. Also it would be able to do to ultralisks what zerglings do to siege tanks and other units when they have superior numbers. mid level gas and resource cost. No ranged attacked just up close its deadly. I guess like a super Ghost that has maybe beam sabers and blades rather than a rifle. Being able to detect burrowed units would be a plus to. Since its a derivative of the Ghost we could call it a Revenant or Specter or something. Maybe like a Terran version of the Dark Templar, with more limited cloaking and no anti air to make it fair. Tell me what ya think.
|
On March 09 2009 03:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Hm in WC3 couldn't you hold down some key to make only the units of the subgroup do that action? I could swear I heard that somewhere ;o
Only problem with your idea tho, is that there's gonna be overlap with abilities and unit names.. IE ok you press S to build scourges but S is also stop. Etc.
as far as i know its only possible if you activate the subgroup order modifier key in the options. its turned off by default..
|
I always thought it would be nice to have some CTRL+Z feature in strategy games, to cancel the last action you did (and also SHIFT+CTRL+Z to redo the action).
For example, if you screw up big time and you tell all your workers to stop, you could do CTRL+Z and cancel that action. If you need your workers to attack a target, once it's dead, CTRL+Z, they'll go back to their minerals already being cloned.
On the other hand, I admit this would once again mostly help newbie players while not really giving benefits to top players who already master everything perfectly, thus reducing the gap between them.
|
From the TL Q&A
"One of the design challenges we are currently dealing with relates to the Dark Pylon, which doesn’t seem to have enough energy tension between probe buffing and acting as an energy reserve for caster units."
A suggestion regarding a way to extend that tension.
Currently, the D.Pylon provides Energy for only 50 extra minerals
Perhaps the Energy Tension can be extended, and also make the Nexus more interesting in the process.
The suggestion is that ALL Protoss energy is shared. Any protoss caster a player has draws their energy from the same pool.
The Pool would be provided by Nexii.
Each Nexus would add 200 to the "size" of the Pool, and would increase the regeneration rate by ~1 energy/sec. ie the standard rate of one caster.
The Nexus would also have the option of entering "Energy Mode" [better name possible] where it would add a larger amount to to pool "size" (say 1000 energy) and add ~10 energy regeneration/sec. the standard rate of 10 casters. However it could not accept minerals/gas and possibily might lose its shields. [making it more vulnerable]
Things that would need to change:
1. Cooldowns for energy using abilities... would become the reason for obtaining multiple casters. ie 1 HTemplar would have to wait for its cooldown to cast a second Storm, wheras 10 HTemplars could just cycle through (and 10 would be harder to kill).
Caster upgrades could get cooldown reductions instead of capacity upgrades (they could also get energy cost reductions)
2. Casters would have to be slightly cheaper ~25 minerals cheaper because their energy generaion abilities require ~1/10 of a Nexus (an additional 40 min cost) [Corsairs, since they are not primarily casters would be exceptions to this]
3. Argus link would be eliminated (since all Protoss would have an auto Argus link)
4. D Pylons would still be required to cast Null Shield and Proton Charge, but now they would start competing with Nullifiers, AntiGravity, High Templars, and Motherships
This would be a Major change but would further diversify Protoss from the others [and easily fits lore wise with the Khala]. Also it would make the Mothership potentially more interesting... if some Mothership abilities had no cooldowns, only thing limiting the single Mothership's use of those abilities would be how many Nexii it had supporting it.
EMP's Protoss only effect (shield damage) would also be balanced with a Protoss only exemption.. can't drain protoss energy because it is not "Located" in any one unit.
|
An Idea to restore Infested buildings (borrowed+modified from the main SC2 thread)
The Infestor for ~150-200 energy (depending on balance) range 1 can put an "Infestation" on any enemy building.
The Infestation is a targetable object with hp. (300 if it is on a standard building, 500 if it is on a 'base' building, ie Nexus/CC/OC/PF/Hatchery/Lair/Hive)
As long as the Infestation is on the building, the building is shut down.
If the Infestation survives on the building for a certain amount of time, 30 sec for a standard building, or 80 sec for a 'base' building, then the building becomes a new building under the control of the Zerg player.
If the building that was Infested is Zerg, then it simply switches control... once a Hatchery has been 'completely infested', it ony changes sides.
If the building is a Protoss/Terran then it becomes an "Infested _______"
a Zerg building (biological; loses hp when off of creep, regenerates hp when on creep)
with very limited functions (ie all functions disabled except the listed ones)
Infested Refineries/Assimilators do the same things
Infested "Base" buildings can act as resource "drop points"
Infested Combat buildings can do combat [Infested Pylons are not required for Infested Photon cannons]
Infested detection buildings can still detect
Infested Terran buildings that are NOT one of the above types can build Infested Marines (either free autoproduced ones every X seconds with a timed life or permanent resource requiring ones)
Infested Bunkers can't load/unload all the units inside are converted into Infested Marines (that can't leave the bunker anymore, but they can fire from it)
Infested Protoss buildings that are NOT one of the above provide Control (the Zerg Infest the advanced protoss machinery and use it as a focus for their "cerebrates" to maintain more control)
[OR the Protoss buildings do some type of minimal combat support... not quite sure]
Gameplay wise this would basically be a "building disabled until the enemy kills off the Infestation"
However if you retain control of the battlefield, then you would get the benefit of the "Infested building" [or a new zerg building]
|
I posted this in another thread. Just a little thought about nukes.
Nuclear Missiles land faster, in proportion to the distance from the silo. 5 seconds when it's <10 matrices away, 12 seconds when it's >30, something like that
That way, you can nuke way faster, like in 5 seconds, just in time to blow away a warp in prism or nydus worm in your base asap. Also opens up new strategies like building a secret silo closer to the enemy's base (if it's still an add-on to the command center, you can float it somewhere, deploy it, make the nuke, and bam, a ghost can nuke the other guy's whole tech in 5 seconds.) That strategy is obviously countered by scouting and probably isn't going to be used by pros, but it's cool and makes sense.
|
Unit name: Disrupter.
Race: Zerg.
Purpose: Midgame anti drop ait to air unit, a more defensive and reactive equivalent to the Scourge.
Cost: 25 minerals, 50 gas (2 come out of each egg).
HP: 25.
Speed: A little faster than the Scourge.
The disrupter is a small flying creature, very similar to the Scourge, but with a different function. Instead of suiciding against enemy aircraft to do massive damage, the Disrupter will attach itself to the ship, slowing it down by 25% and causing damage to it at a very slow rate. The slowing effect as well as the damage stack, so if 4 or more disrupters are on one ship, it will stop moving and will remain paralyzed mid air until all the Disrupter or the ship itself are destroyed.
Once the Disrupters attach themselves to a enemy ship, they cant separate again and they will die if the ship dies.
They are the perfect counter to lonely Phase Prisms and Medivacs trying to drop Zerg bases, as the enemy would have to take the risk of getting intercepted by a cloud of these cheap and fast units or getting some escort that would delay the drop and therefore make it more risky and less effective.
And given their low HP and nature of their attack, they would be useless late game with many enemy anti air units, as suiciding a large number of Disrupters against an enemy enemy fleet would only buy you very little time, not justifying the cost.
They would solve the aparent Zerg weakness against drops, without affecting other aspects of the game.
|
What about the ability to play 2V2 but only two races. Like two players controlling one base, i think micro would be amazing because one player would be managing economy while the other does boxer marines.
|
|
|
I would so much like to see a new zerg air melee unit. Maybe a replacement for scourge.
This unit would be about the size of a scourge, and quite fast. When it starts attacking an enemy, it sticks to it so that the victim can't attack it. Instead, other, friendly units would have to target it, and while shooting at it, the victim would also take some damage (to represent that some shots missed their target, or splash damage).
This zerg unit would have quite a big number of hp (like 60) and/or big armor, but the damage would be quite small, like that of zerglings. The biggest thing to worry about in this unit would be the friendly fire caused by other units targeting these little creatures. And if there's no support nearby, the death would be sertain.
Once the unit is sticked to an enemy, it cannot be controlled anymore. When the opponent unit is destroyed, these creatures would perish also (dunno about that, though). Being melee, this unit would get melee attack upgrades, unlike any other air unit, which could make it a feasible air addition to mass zerglings (or possibly ultras, dunno).
The use of this unit would lead to some decisions: should I sacrifice this air unit or should I assign my other units to deal with the situation? This would also require some calculations and estimates: how long does it take for the zerg unit to destroy my ship, and will my friendly fire kill that nasty piece of work in time or my own spacecraft instead?
This may sound quite far-fetched and complicated, but I don't lose anything if I post my little idea here and maybe get some feedback
|
What about the ability to play 2V2 but only two races. Like two players controlling one base, i think micro would be amazing because one player would be managing economy while the other does boxer marines.
im confused, are talking about team melee or something else ?
|
On April 26 2009 23:32 StrongSalt wrote:
What about the ability to play 2V2 but only two races. Like two players controlling one base, i think micro would be amazing because one player would be managing economy while the other does boxer marines.
this already exists, "team melee"
|
On April 30 2009 11:31 virLudens wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2009 23:32 StrongSalt wrote:
What about the ability to play 2V2 but only two races. Like two players controlling one base, i think micro would be amazing because one player would be managing economy while the other does boxer marines. this already exists, "team melee"
Really? i don't think it does exitst. I have yet to see it .
i think i didn't explain it well enough, im talking about two people being the same player
EX: Boxer and Nada as the blue terran in the six oclock position
Yellow and jaedong as the red zerg in the nine oclcok position.
So its a simple TvZ but two zerg players using the red zerg, and two terran players using the red zerg.
|
That's it.
Although with Team melee you also start off with workers from additional races.... so
1 base
multiple players
multiple races
|
Some unit changes I and FA have been thinking of. :D
Hellion
Two new abilities, upgraded at Tech Lab at Factory.
- Napalm Trace
When activated, this ability causes the Hellion to leave a napalm trace behind it during X seconds' time. Afterwards, the trace is automatically set on fire, and burns for Y time. Units which get in contact with it start to burn, which lasts for those Y seconds (i.e. damage over time). Units standing directly in the napalm trace suffer from more damage than those that leave it ASAP.
This ability can be used to effectively cut off areas, be it in battle (cutting of narrow passages, preventing flanks, cutting off reinforcements), when defending, harassing (to prevent workers from escaping or even directly damaging them) or you could even leave a napalm trace behind LOS-blockers to inflict terrible, terrible damage to unsuspecting enemies. ^_____^
- Nitro
Gives the Hellion a temporary speed boost.
Both Nitro and Napalm Trace share a common cooldown, so you can't use both at the same time and you have to use them wisely. :D
More to come (redesigned Corruptor, MotherShit replacement, reworked Nighthawk and Archon, and more).
|
I know MBS and unlimited unit selection is here to stay and it is way too late to get changed, but I just wanted to throw this idea out there.
What if the unit selection size was 16 or something and buildings counted as 4 units? So a player can hotkey at most 4 Barracks together in one control group and pressing a command will make them act as one unit. I thought this was a clean and simple medium that bridged SBS and MBS together.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2009 01:24 Krikkitone wrote:
That's it.
Although with Team melee you also start off with workers from additional races.... so
1 base
multiple players
multiple races
Nah, you can pick races too just make sure you pick races for the vacant slots as well, or you end up with those being random
So if you play a 2v2 team melee you have to pick TTTT if you want only terran.
But yeah it's basically 100% what he described.
|
Reposting an updated version on this page for more exposure.
Some unit changes I and FA have been thinking of. :D
Hellion
Two new abilities, upgraded at Tech Lab at Factory.
- Napalm Trace
When activated, this ability causes the Hellion to leave a napalm trace behind it during X seconds' time. Afterwards, the trace is automatically set on fire, and burns for Y time. Units which get in contact with it start to burn, which lasts for those Y seconds (i.e. damage over time). Units standing directly in the napalm trace suffer from more damage than those that leave it ASAP.
This ability can be used to effectively cut off areas, be it in battle (cutting of narrow passages, preventing flanks, cutting off reinforcements), when defending, harassing (to prevent workers from escaping or even directly damaging them) or you could even leave a napalm trace behind LOS-blockers to inflict terrible, terrible damage to unsuspecting enemies. ^_____^
- Nitro
Gives the Hellion a temporary speed boost.
Both Nitro and Napalm Trace share a common cooldown, so you can't use both at the same time and you have to use them wisely. :D
Those abilities emphasize on the Terran's theme of defending with units (Bunkers, Mines, Tanks in BW) by allowing for lots of creativity regarding making pushes/encampments, as well as harassing with those very units (legacy of the Vulture ).
Corruptor
They're now the new Scourges, so to speak, i.e. produced two at a time, take 0.5 pop, cheap, massable, about the same resource costs (they're obviously smaller too).
The difference is, they now have a melee attack much like air mode Stingers from Armies of Exigo.
What's more, they'd be able to corrupt enemy air units, effectively turning their wrecks into flying incubators (immobile) for new Corruptors. The incubators would be temporary in the sense that they'd start at the corrupted unit's full HP and then gradually lose it (like Zerg buildings off creep). Over the course of their life they'd spawn their popcap worth of new Corruptors at a steady rate - the enemy killing them prematurely would mean they wouldn't be able to spawn all Corruptors.
Corrupting would work that way: when the enemy unit has green HP you can't corrupt it; when it has yellow HP it'd take the popcap equivalent of them to corrupt them; and when they're in their red HP it'd take half of their popcap equivalent to corrupt them, meaning you can spawn twice as many new Corruptors if you target units with red HP only!!
Additionally, you wouldn't be able to kill Corruptors inside your units, but they'd died on their own after some time unless the unit gets fully corrupted on time. So the best way to combat Corruptors would be moving the partially corrupted units to safety until the effect wears off (Corruptors inside die).
Example:
You want to corrupt a Viking, which costs 2 supply. Each Corruptor costs 0.5 supply.
Green HP - you can't do that.
Yellow HP - it takes 4 Corruptors.
Red HP - it takes 2 Corruptors.
Let's say you corrupted a Viking with red HP. It now turns into a flying incubator with 125 HP (Viking's full HP) and spawns 4 new Corruptors as it slowly dies. You just got twice as many Corruptors as you invested!
I think that version of the Corruptor would be much more fun to play with than generic stationary turrets. It capitalizes on the Zerg's swarm and infestation themes both at the same time. What's more, it allows for a much higher skill cap and more interesting interactions between the two players. ;]
Revenant - MotherShip replacement
Judicators, after losing their high status in the Protoss society, are long gone, however, they have left their monumental ships, the Arbiters, behind. The Dark Templar have taken advatage of that, and profanated them, turning them into ressurected Arbiters - the Revenants.
Some stats: speed the same as Arbiter's, energy pool up to balance, HP+shields about the same as Arbiter's but the ration tilted heavily towards shields (vulnerable to EMP).
Three abilities:
- Cloaking Aura - a more powerful incarnation of the Cloaking Aura from BW, it's now capable of cloaking buildings too, however, it's a channeling spell, meaning it drains energy over time (just like Ghost's Cloak)
- Psionic Inhibitation Aura - this aura makes the Revenant one of the most formidable offensive support units in StarCraft history: it reduces the line of sight and range of all units within its radius to 1, effectively turning them into crippled melee units, but not without any drawbacks - it affects both enemy AND friendly units, meaning you have to be careful while using it; drains energy over time as well, requires an upgrade.
Later on, the Psionic Inhibitation Aura can be upgraded to also prevent casters from casting spells (like Silence in WC3, but an aura), again, both enemy and friendly. It makes the Revenant a strong anti-caster unit.
- Bonding - Recall reimagined. Requires an upgrade.
After this ability is researched, Observers can turn into Beacons (fully reversable, just like Siege Mode, etc.) at the cost of becoming visible. Revenants can now teleport two those very Beacons, taking any nearby friendly (ground?) units with them.
This puts even more emphasis on the Observer positioning for the Protoss players, while forcing others to be much more aware of those stealthed spies at the same time. It gives the Protoss A LOT of flexibility simple Warp-in does not provide.
The idea of Revenants seems to me as much more fitting both gameplay as well as lore wise. I mean, giant ships coming to the rescue as Protoss are in such a critical condition? What the heck were they doing when the Protoss were at their peak? Couldn't they save them from the Zerg opression? As for gameplay, this unit seems like a worthy successor of the Arbiter, as opposed to the generic MotherShip.
More to come (redesigned Corruptor, MotherShit replacement, reworked Nighthawk and Archon, and more).
|
Minor tweaks:
Ghost abilities:
cloak
psi sensing (passive)
nuke
emp
snipe
Ultra - speed upgrade back
Warp Prism - must land in order to switch to warp mode, changing back takes quite some time (or warp mode is irreverisble) to ensure the whole process is more thoughtful and not as cheap
BC variants:
D-Matrix
Yamato
Thor:
vs. ground - HUGE pneumatic hammers (+ vs. armor/buildings), i.e. melee
vs. air - gol rockets vs. valk rockets - toggle between the two (one of them has to be upgraded)
Archon:
immolation (passive, works like in WC3)
"mana shield" - allows the Archon's energy to act as extra HP
feedback
|
I have noticed alot of concern over the balence of Roaches in ZvZ, and as a zerg player myself i find myself worried about it a bit. So what if we attached an effect to a zerg unit(not sure what fits the role) that counteracted natural regen(not healing from an outside source such as medivac) for X seconds. This adds risk to using roaches and doesn't make ZvZ rely solely on roaches early game.
|
I dig the corruptor idea. given, it's basically a face-hugger from alien, but it beats the hell out of stationary turrets. I mean, seriously. they turn into turrets? fuckin bleh.
doubtless you considered the spawn-all-at-once approach. any reason you chose gauntlet-style spawning instead? is the former imba?
for that matter, while the idea sounds great on paper, I'm not sure how this unit would fulfill its role. a couple of corruptors aren't going to be sniping vessels and dropships anytime soon. therefore we have nothing but glorified, dirt-cheap queens, since enough dmg has to be done before corruption can even begin, let alone complete. I think the attack mode really needs to be revised; otherwise you'll basically have lings in air.
I suppose if corruption is intended to be a gimmick like infested ccs and only useful for picking off lone shuttles or something, I guess that's fine too. potential reproduction and not pew pew corsair except melee ought to be the corrupter's main threat though.
|
The reason why they wouldn't spawn all at once is the fact that spawning gradually gives the opposing player the incentive to kill the incubators in order to diminish the amount of Corruptors spawned.
As for your other concerns, I think this could be balanced by tweaking the amount of Corroptors needed to corrupt a unit. Maybe base it on the enemy unit's size? Dunno, I'm just proposing a somewhat unrefined idea here, obviously.
Oh, and "lings in air" - in Armies of Exigo Ling equivalents could literally fly, and everybody seemed to have liked the mechanic.
Corruptors would still be perfect for sniping lone Dropships since you'd get ALL your Corruptors back, unlike Scourges. And when used in conjunction with other units or their melee attack, you could spawn twice as many Corruptors as you've used.
So, keep in mind that if you snipe that Dropship with those 4 Corruptors you get them back via the Incubator, unless it gets killed.
edit:
So, ultimately, corruption could be used to snipe key units, ESPECIALLY if you can make sure Incubators stay alive for long enough.
It can also be used to heavily overwhelm the enemy in air battles by corrupting whittled down (red HP) units and thus spawning dozens of new Corruptors.
In other words, Corruptors allow for everything Scourges did and much more than that.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Yeah, it was an upgrade for the zergling equivalent - stingers - which enabled all of them to fly.
I actually think it wouldn't be a half-bad idea to allow lings to morph into "corrupters" once you have a spire (sort of like they can morph to banelings).
Btw, another thing to consider when talking lings in air, is that there is not nearly as much anti-air splash in SC2! The phoenix doesn't have splash, the viking doesn't have splash.. Which will make swarmy melee air more viable.
|
perhaps my qualms weren't presented clearly enough. when an opponent realizes his dropship got scourged, it's already too late. since this unit is apparently a spiritual successor to the scourge, this situation should be paralleled. considering the unit's stats, it would need, relatively speaking, a pretty buff melee to make corruptors able to damage lone air units quickly enough to corrupt them.
here's the kicker: if we're getting flying lings, why not just forget the whole corruption mechanic and pump lots of em out anyway until you have a critical mass? zerg equivalent of bisu build basically. but if air melee is nerfed to discourage this strategy, how can lone corruptors possibly be able to snipe units, since they have to do enough damage in the first place before the opponent is duly able to react (and then of course wait for lost corruptors to be replaced)? granted bw players don't just randomly mass scourge, but again: now there's flying zerglings. it's a paradoxical situation, deciding the roles of melee and corruption.
also, in the instant-spawn situation, it's not like corruptors should be made immediately. allow some gestation time before they spawn. I must have forgot to imply it.
|
On May 14 2008 18:12 h3r1n6 wrote:
I would like to see a much improved observer mode. This would help the e-sport nature of the game, since it can be more exciting to watch.
One thing that has been mentioned already is the ability to zoom out for observers, which is a good idea.
My suggestion would be a complete different UI for observer mode, that takes up less space on the screen, to make more of the game visible, and only concentrates on the key features it needs:
-Resource/supply counters for the players
-Toggable statistic windows during the game, like a unit table showing the numbers for each unit type a player has, a little window showing the current research status etc.
-Dramatic health numbers, when a building has very few hp left, the game will show a red number above it (drop targeting a hatchery), showing its health points. This might need a clever algorithm for to when show those numbers and when not, because otherwise it could be annoying.
-Research/train bars over buildings, showing the current research/unit beeing researched/built in that building with its progress.
I'll throw in a few more ideas for the observer UI here:
- ability to highlight a certain unit type on the minimap (diffrent colour, shining or something) for each race. In sc:bw this would be useful for example to see the mutalisk movement in a ZvZ, shuttles of the P and scourges of the Z, DTs and overlords, arbiters and science vessels, etc. im sure there are similar things in sc2 as well.
- a toggle that gives you minmap pings (or other notification, even sounds maybe) when any player gets an "we are under attack", when a shuttle unloads, etc. I would suggest also notifications for start of upgrades etc, but that is allready implemented on the observer HUD if ive understood correctly. Just to not miss any of the action when multitasking goes on.
- some hotkey to show all rally points on the minimap (or the real map, or both) for both player.
- income rate for both players is in the game already, right?
- show not only how many units are in the game, but also seprately what is being built atm. to clearer se when someone is switching. there would then be 15 mutas in game, but 8 hydras and nu mutas building for example. While having just 15 mutas and 8 hydras on the list wouldnt make it very clear if the player plans to do some kind of mix, or do a complete switch.
ok, I'll stop here. Sorry if this is a repost or anything. My only research was to "show all" pages of this thread and do a search for "observer" and "replay"... I didnt want to read through 26 pages, sorry.
And gj from the blizzard developers, i'm looking forward to play the final version, whenever it may be done. Thanks, and gl with the last tunings.
|
starcraft 2 looks sick eh? MBS and automining will definetely make the game more competitve
|
On May 19 2009 04:45 proscplaya wrote:
starcraft 2 looks sick eh? MBS and automining will definetely make the game more competitve
are trolls/flamebating banned?
anyway, i really really like the hellion ideas. A lot.
|
Artosis, SDM, and Tasteless all as units SDM replacing mothership
I don't like how people are getting complicated with the corruptor. Its a good concept, but really thats going to be gay to manage in-game.
|
On May 19 2009 04:45 proscplaya wrote:
starcraft 2 looks sick eh? MBS and automining will definetely make the game more competitve
ban
|
One of my main concerns with SC2 is a lack of required scouting.
I don't think I need to go into why scouting is important in SC or why it makes it a more entertaining game to watch and play.
How about unique colors/mechanics assigned to building upgrades?
I know that sounds a little confusing so let me explain in broodwar terms.
Right now there is no distinguishing feature between a dragoon range upgrade or an air 1 weapons upgrade at the cybernetics core. A player can see the building spinning and knows resources are being invested, however there is no indication as to what is being upgraded. The templar archives has no indication of production whatsoever.
I think a distinguishing feature between the two upgrades... say the color green for the range upgrade, but the color white and some distinct animation for the air upgrade.. would direct players to check opponents mains, not just for production capability but upgrade/tech routes as well.
At the risk of removing a small portion of the meta game, I think it would encourage consistent scouting throughout the game and perhaps prod new players towards the importance of scouting.
|
On May 23 2009 02:55 Diggity wrote:
One of my main concerns with SC2 is a lack of required scouting.
I don't think I need to go into why scouting is important in SC or why it makes it a more entertaining game to watch and play.
How about unique colors/mechanics assigned to building upgrades?
I know that sounds a little confusing so let me explain in broodwar terms.
Right now there is no distinguishing feature between a dragoon range upgrade or an air 1 weapons upgrade at the cybernetics core. A player can see the building spinning and knows resources are being invested, however there is no indication as to what is being upgraded. The templar archives has no indication of production whatsoever.
I think a distinguishing feature between the two upgrades... say the color green for the range upgrade, but the color white and some distinct animation for the air upgrade.. would direct players to check opponents mains, not just for production capability but upgrade/tech routes as well.
At the risk of removing a small portion of the meta game, I think it would encourage consistent scouting throughout the game and perhaps prod new players towards the importance of scouting.
I don't really agree with this. First of all part of starcraft is not knowing exactly what your opponent is doing. As cited, even if you do scout you cannot be 100% certain what upgrades your opponent is going for. Although this is a bad example, because early game you can be about 99.9% sure he is going range. Which brings me to my second point which is that a part of the skill of SC is knowing what should be going on. For example and experienced zerg player will know that his protoss enemy is going going +1 weapons if the Forge is spinning, because that is the smart thing for the protoss to do.
So basically my point is this: why add another feature to the game that is essentially unnecessary that will reduce the required knowledge to play the game at a certain level. It would just make the game more "noob accessible", instead of guiding new players to the importance of learning timings and upgrade advantages. Just my thoughts on the matter.
|
Which brings me to my second point which is that a part of the skill of SC is knowing what should be going on. For example and experienced zerg player will know that his protoss enemy is going going +1 weapons if the Forge is spinning, because that is the smart thing for the protoss to do.
I remember reading this sudoku book that talked about the difference between a hand made puzzle and a computer generated puzzle. The gurus of sudoku puzzle making create a puzzle that shifts the focus of the participant around the puzzle in a natural and fluid way, ultimately delivering a zen like experience. Having done a few of these puzzles I have to agree that the hand made puzzles are much better.
In the same manner, I think that this might guide new players to think about the game differently through the natural flow which would create a more pleasant gaming experience. Its a matter of perspective but I don't agree with the notion of intentionally creating a unnecessarily high learning curve. High learning curves don't necessarily make the game a better competitive sport and I definitely don't think that it creates a fun gaming experience. (this from the guy who loves nethack...)
I also don't think its a critical or skill shifting feature but I do think it would add some polish to the game. Never the less I understand your perspective.
|
Another thought:
I assume that apm measurement will be a natural listing in the replay system. I also assume that apm will be monitored and measured to show progress or perhaps link players of the same skill level together in the new battle.net.
After a lot of observation I think that change of frame is a better measure of multi-tasking than apm. By change of frame, I mean the rate of change of the actual viewing screen through hotkeys, function keys and quick mouse movement. Perhaps a combination of change of frame rates and apm could be linked up with a player's record to find suitable match ups on battle.net
|
On May 23 2009 17:32 Diggity wrote:Show nested quote +Which brings me to my second point which is that a part of the skill of SC is knowing what should be going on. For example and experienced zerg player will know that his protoss enemy is going going +1 weapons if the Forge is spinning, because that is the smart thing for the protoss to do.
I remember reading this sudoku book that talked about the difference between a hand made puzzle and a computer generated puzzle. The gurus of sudoku puzzle making create a puzzle that shifts the focus of the participant around the puzzle in a natural and fluid way, ultimately delivering a zen like experience. Having done a few of these puzzles I have to agree that the hand made puzzles are much better. In the same manner, I think that this might guide new players to think about the game differently through the natural flow which would create a more pleasant gaming experience. Its a matter of perspective but I don't agree with the notion of intentionally creating a unnecessarily high learning curve. High learning curves don't necessarily make the game a better competitive sport and I definitely don't think that it creates a fun gaming experience. (this from the guy who loves nethack...) I also don't think its a critical or skill shifting feature but I do think it would add some polish to the game. Never the less I understand your perspective.
It isn't so much about there being a higher learning curve, as so much as to "get in your opponent's head". By doing so you get a view of what may/is happenening, and to have new players play without this thought process would hamper there ultimate knowlege of the game. Let me explain. So as a zerg one may scout a spinning forge, and assume that the protoss is going 1+ weapons. This is known because of timings and general game knowlege (ie zealots will now two hit lings). The zerg will then take appropriate counter measures. This may be getting lurkers, getting 1+ carrapace or harrassing economy ect., as one could assume that the protoss will use some strategy involving zealots/ ground push. Also the zerg can assume that the push will follow the upgrade, giving the protoss a window of advantage. All this can be gathered and combined with other scouting information to aid the zerg. This really isn't that high level thinking.
However, if a newer player didn't understand the methodology to why the protoss is getting the upgrade, and just knows that he is getting 1+ weapons; the response will not be apt. There will be a reaction, but I don't think that it will be the same. By seeing exactly what is going on will allow people to just "see what they scout", instead of having to think about what it is they are seeing. In this way it isn't creating a higher skill curve, yet decreasing the thought that has to be put into a portion of the game. This, in my opinion guides to a more natural flow of the game. Instead of just reacting to what you see, you have to think about what you see- and respond appropriately. To bring sudoku back in the mix, think of how boringly repetitive it would get if you used the same pattern to solve every puzzle, you didn't have to think about how to attack each unique layout of the board. Adding this feature would be a step in that direction, the direction of being more pattern that thought.
|
Semi-serious suggestion:
Add a "Nazi KeSPA Mode" where the only in-game chat allowed is "gg" and "ppp" (except when paused, obviously).
|
I really like the Napalm trace idea for the Hellion, as well as the Revenant unit concept. However, I think the Corruptor idea is too complex and circumstantial. I think units die too fast to make that ability useful.
|
So I just had a thought, nothing too major but I think it would be useful and interesting.
A dynamic/living manual. Let me explain.
When a game like SC2 comes out it might have numbers of things listed on a manual or a webpage, marine hitpoints, hydralisk damage etc etc. But those quickly become outdated.
Right now if you want exact numbers of units in the game you would have to either trust a webpage (never kept up to date), possibly get the info from patch notes (which are usually not specific) or crack open StarEdit. Opening StarEdit is just not something the majority of people do, especially to just look through in game numbers.
So there could be an addition, sort of like a bestiary, which lists all the units with all their respective numbers, damage type, shows an attack animation, shows a death animation, building produced from etc. Without all the map editor fluff. This way it's a nice reference for new players to quickly figure out the basics and for more advanced players a good way to keep track of specifics through patch changes.
Are there any game out there right now with "living" manuals?
|
I apologize if this idea has already been mentioned before, but what if a drone could morph into two drones (or into a pair of a new unit that could gather resources and have limited construction capabilities?)
I believe this can be used to increase macro for Zerg as well as potentially introducing new strategies depending on what the drone actually morphs into.
My suggestion would be to let drones morph into a pair of "Hatchlings" for about 25~50 minerals. Hatchlings are basically a mix of a drone and a zergling.
- Time to morph: same as drone
- 35 HP
- 0 Armor
- 5 Attack (which benefit from attack upgrades)
- Attack speed equivalent of an zergling without Adrenal Glands
- Movement speed will be the same but will not hover anymore (so they do trigger mines - if mines will be back in SC2)
- Does not benefit from creepwalk (or benefit only when not gathering resources)
- Can gather minerals and gas
- Can Burrow
- Can construct basic buildings such as Hatchery, Sunken Colony, Spore Colony
Benefits:
- Greatly increases Zerg's worker production capability. Zerg no longer have to choose between making drones or unit with their larvae (until they run out of drones to convert to hatchlings anyways.)
- Zerg's base defense is now somewhat stronger since Hatchlings are offensively stronger than drones.
- Zerg are able to recover from economic raids significantly quicker.
- Hatchlings are better at defense than drones mid and late game due to attack upgrades.
- Increases macro due to drones need to be commanded to morph into hatchings separate from producing drones from a hatchery.
Pitfalls:
- This ability may potentially give Zerg too much advantage in resource gathering.
- Hatchlings are easier to kill in econ raids.
- Making too many hatchlings at a time early game can hinder your economy.
- Are vulnerable to mines.
- Cannot be used to tech.
|
I'd recommend that hatchlings not be able to build anything at all, for simplicity's sake.
|
I think there needs to be a serious NERF on the Hunter Seeker missiles. They need have less time in the air, according to what i have read you need to evade them for 15 seconds, and i think 8-10 is more fair. Also, are they calling the ship that uses them Nighthawks or Ravens? Because i have read and heard both used.
|
Marshall Islands104 Posts
Zerg Creep Drop Improvement
Most people who have played Blizzard's most recent build have written that the Zerg stick out as the weakest race.
One tech moved just a little earlier would change it all. The overlord's spread creep ability is T2 I believe, which makes it useful for the 30% speed boost and moving units via nydus worm. Move the tech earlier. If people have access to quick creep anywhere on the map--sunkens will take on a whole new aspect for the zerg.
There are two ways to make this change:
(1) Move the tech to T1 and make it expensive (minerals and some gas). This allows for creep to block people's naturals as well as lets the Zerg put a sunken on the map.
(2) Keep the tech at T2, but make it very, very cheap ( just a few minerals, and no gas). This delays the tech to T2, but will immediately let Zerg take control of the map with sunkens.
The benefits to the Zerg would be huge--maybe even to much. Testing will need to determine that. A Zerg who goes straight for this tech at the cost of something else (say his eco or the first 3 lings) will gain many abilities.
(1) Zerg will be able to block expos (or maybe even the natural) with creep provided the tech is a Hatch tech (T1). This may prove too powerful--though if an opponent kills the Zerg's overlord, no expo harass can occur.
(2) Zerg will be able to put down a sunken colony down. This is the tricky one. If any Zerg can get a sunken down anywhere too easily, sunken rushes would be too powerful. Set the T1 tech cost high enough, and sunken rushes should be at least possible, though not too powerful. I think, though, that the ability to place sunkens on the map in general and especially on cliffs will help the Zerg tactically. You can put a sunken near your opponents base simply so slow him down. You can put the sunken up on a cliff that his units need to path by. You can even put it up near your choke. Early sunkens on the map also makes the Zerg somewhat map-dependant (certain cliff locations will benefit them). Map-dependance is a good thing and helps balance. Read RaGe's article named Racial Balance: The Lazy Way Is The Good Way for more on this. Technically, cliff dependancy might not be great because the Zerg usually profit from open areas for flanking, but....
(3) Zerg will be able to hide tech buildings on creep in another spot on the map. This is probably not a major consideration.
(4) Zerg will be able do do interesting things to bunker rushes and Protoss forge expands. Say a bunker goes up at the Zerg's choke in an attempt to contain/rush. Provided you were spending your resources on the tech for creep spewing, you can spread creep the proper distance from the bunker, and set up your sunken. Terran may still try to kill your sunken while it is morphing--but then that actually sounds pretty good for balance.
(5) This is somewhat general, but sunkens + your army will definitely help out (as I believe sunkens in SC2 can move). A player will have to decide if the cost of researching the tech early on is worth with having sunkens with his zerglings.
This whole "early creep spwewing" idea first sounded too powerful, but a proper cost for the tech can delay it to exactly where it is effective, but balanced. It shouldn't be so cheap that Zerg always gets it--Zerg must be specifically going for the tech in order to allot enough minerals for the tech. Also each race has it's own responsibilites. For instance, it is the Zerg's responsibility to be ready to dance Hydras out of a psi storm's way. It is also Terran's responsibility to check if Protoss is trying to hide DT tech. Now it will be Terran and Protoss's responsibility to check if Zerg is trying to put sunkens on key positions in the map. Remember, though, that the Protoss gets the Nullifier and Terran gets the Marine early enough to prevent extended harassment of expos or the main (both the Nullifier and Marine will chase off the overlord).
Of course early creep spewing could be way too powerful if it comes too cheaply in T1. Balance will have to decide EXACTLY when it should be available (but definitely earlier than the current SC2 build). For instance, a little testing might show that the Zerg shouldn't be able to block a person's natural with creep. Then it will have to cost a little more--just enough to make it late for blocking someone's natural but still viable for sunkens. Et cetera.
Finally, I am sorry for being somewhat vague about the "exact critical cost" for this tech. I do not work at blizzard and thus have no way to test this with the latest build of SC2. If I had to guess I might say something like 200 minerals 100 gas T1. Maybe even 100:100 with the prerequisite of the spawning pool.
Thank you for reading. Your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
|
Observation mode:
Have the ability to observer the top X number of players on the ladders ranked games. Press a button on the battlenet interface and it opens a list that shows all ranked games played by the top X number of players in the last Y hours. Each game will loop itself repeatedly and if you just click the game to join you will be put into whatever time that the game is currently at along with all other people and be allowed to chat with them about the game. Also have the ability to type in an "observer password" to a game that starts the game at its beginning and other players can type the observer password to sync the game with you.
Games on observer mode are put into 15 minute delay so that the risk of "ghosting" for players does not exist.
This helps the game with three main points.
1. Players are given something to do within the game, enjoyable just to watch top level games.
2. Lower level players have direct access to build orders used by players who are successful. Although this takes some of the "creative aspect" out of the game, the build orders will be copied regardless of an existence of this system and this puts more emphasis on who can execute the build the best rather then who can make the best BO.
3. Players who achieve extremely high ranks on ladder using pure cheese builds will be much more well known and easy to counter, encouraging standard and well-rounded play. This also encourages players to constantly adapt and learn new strategies, because a player will only stay at the top doing 1 single build if he can execute it extremely well.
|
On June 04 2009 00:18 GogoKodo wrote:
So I just had a thought, nothing too major but I think it would be useful and interesting.
A dynamic/living manual. Let me explain.
When a game like SC2 comes out it might have numbers of things listed on a manual or a webpage, marine hitpoints, hydralisk damage etc etc. But those quickly become outdated.
<snipped for brevity>
Are there any game out there right now with "living" manuals?
Has any other game done this. Yes but they are all unfinished compared to what the end product should be like you are describing because it is harder to pull off than you might be thinking it is.
Considering what Blizzard has done for SC in the past expect to have this type of service. Whether or not it will have the same level of detail as the WoW Armory is unknown because SC2 will have to rely moreso on box sales unless they have some other ideas for an additional stream of revenue via BNET.
I've posted this on bnet forums but I would like to also post the following here as well.
I'm not too thrilled with the Thor being a factory unit and not providing anything different for the Terrans that the Battlecruiser couldn't already fill.
My suggestion then is to create a new hover unit with a top speed similar to the Vulture with Ion Thrusters. It attacks ground only but it has an alternative passive mode that allows it to use its own ground attack to protect itself and friendly ground units from incoming air to ground missile attacks.
Typhoon
2 Damage x 8 hits, Fast, spiked
Defense 2, Mechanical, Armored
Range: 3
125 Min 125 Gas
HP 90
Upgrades
Defensive Matrix - (125 Energy) Creates an energy grid anchored on a specific terran object. Any terran unit and building is shielded reducing incoming damage by 50%.
Grid Fire - (Passive) Integrates new targeting computers into the Typhoon allowing it to intercept missile attacks reducing damage.
The following units' attacks would be affected by Grid Fire.
Mutalisks' Glave Wurms
Brood Lord Spores (but broodlings will still be spawned even if the attack itself is negated)
Carriers' Interceptors (It won't negate the damage Interceptors deal but instead deal damage to the Interceptors themselves)
Banshee missles
This would a better way of replacing the goliath with a unique unit.
Just to clear up any questions about Gridfire.
Each of the 8 shots don't immediately destroy a missile attack. For example the new glave worm is a 10+3+1 damage attack while the brood lord spores do 20 damage.
When the Typhoon Gridfires it completely negates the mutas attack with 7 of its hits and the eighth hit can be used to reduce another incoming air attack or hit an enemy ground unit.
But for the spore the Brood lord will be able to deal 4 damage to its target because gridfire wasn't strong enough to reduce all of the damage.
When the Typhoon receives a +1 attack upgrade it is then able to negate Brood Lords' attack entirely.
For balance purposes I'm guessing the Typhoon may have to be forced to do 1x8 damage from the start so that way upgrading weapon attacks mean a lot more with two upgrades instead of just the first one.
|
Just a minor issue - I'm not sure if this is an option in War3 or not
Please allowing unallying a teammate after they've left the game. It's very annoying to have somebody leave in a team game when they have thigns in your base. You have to manually target their units one by one if you want to get ride of them, which is extraordinarily annoying. IF i could make my units do it themselves, that would be much better
|
In a replay you can watch from any players first person view, or in a free cam observation view. I think they should add the option for a person to watch a replay and RECORD their own viewpoint. Then when the replay is viewed again or by others an extra view mode will be available, 1st person observer. This combined with voice recording would allow commentaries like you see in a BR or on YouTube etc rendered on your pc on the fly for perfect quality.
It might also be an option to lock the replay to only 1st person observer mode if one is created to allow the author of the replay to keep their exact build order and techniques hidden.
|
On December 12 2009 07:35 GeneralStan wrote:
Just a minor issue - I'm not sure if this is an option in War3 or not
Please allowing unallying a teammate after they've left the game. It's very annoying to have somebody leave in a team game when they have thigns in your base. You have to manually target their units one by one if you want to get ride of them, which is extraordinarily annoying. IF i could make my units do it themselves, that would be much better
You necro-posted here just say that?
Of course you will get control of your ally's troops and buildings if he leaves the game. It already works that way in war3, and Blizzard is certainly not going to take away that feature.
|
On December 12 2009 09:27 Drunken.Jedi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2009 07:35 GeneralStan wrote:
Just a minor issue - I'm not sure if this is an option in War3 or not
Please allowing unallying a teammate after they've left the game. It's very annoying to have somebody leave in a team game when they have thigns in your base. You have to manually target their units one by one if you want to get ride of them, which is extraordinarily annoying. IF i could make my units do it themselves, that would be much better You necro-posted here just say that? Of course you will get control of your ally's troops and buildings if he leaves the game. It already works that way in war3, and Blizzard is certainly not going to take away that feature.
Not just speculation either. Blizzard has confirmed that this is how it works a long time ago. But they went a step further and said that in a 2v2 for example, you can allow your allies to control your troops and vica versa while you are both still playing. Which would add a lot of cooperative options for 2vs2. Have one player perform macro while other micros all the troops, build specific units for your ally to use. So he can for example use a Stalker/Ling army while your doing something else etc.
|
Zerg scourge replacement
corrupter upgrade: explosive sacs
When activated, the corrupter does AoE damage to all surrounding air targets.
|
Give roaches the devourer's old attack, and nerf the regeneration rate a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.battlereports.com/users/Raider/newage09.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4675/nydusze5.jpg)
![[image loading]](/staff/FrozenArbiter/Hellion.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6338/napalmtracekopia.jpg)
