Poll : Mothership

My problem is not that they showed one unit and then changed it. My problem is they showed a good unit alot of people liked and then they radically changed the theme of the unit im expecially annoyed by this because i believe the first version could have been balanced. Here is why: (Alot of these reasons are assumptions because that is all we can do at the moment)

1. The orignal Mothership did not seem like a counter for a specific unit it more seemed to be a counter to the general swarming strategy whether it be an air swarm or ground swarm.

2. Eye_Carumba you keep mentioning how the oroginal Mothership would fair when multiple groups of units of would be fighting each other instead of one group vs one group of units. I know this is a crude example but assuming 2 players (one of them protoss) spend the same amount of minerals into making 4 groups (1 for defense and 3 offensive groups labeled as D A1 A2 and A3) and the Protoss players builds a Mothership and puts it into one group and makes everything else equal while the other player makes 4 equal groups. Why would (Arbitary numbers that represent the power of the grtoups) 5 + 5 + 5 + 9 of the protoss player vs the 6 + 6 + 6 + 6 of the other player be unbalanced for the protoss player, both groups equal 24?

3. Eye_Carumba while i understand your argument that the original Mothership forced the protoss player to put alot more of his power into one group why is that a bad thing? The protoss player made the choice to build a mothership instead of multiple versions of other units that would of made his 4 groups equal. The way the blizzcon Mothership worked is you could make the 4 groups more equal while using the Mothership. Why is that neccesary when he could do that already by just chooseing to avoid using the Mothership? The only real difference i can see is one way the theme of the Mothership is more complete while the other way the theme of th Mothership is more butchered. While i know you could make the argument "The protoss player would then be forced to not use one of his units because of its design" while that is true how many players use EVERY single unit available to them? I think the answer is pretty close to none. So the argument pretty much comes back to how complete the theme of the unit is. Because almost anything reasonable can be balanced and the original idea for the Mothership was reasonable for the race they gave it to. Also im confident the original Mothership could be balanced with a few tweaks just like alot of people who have read this thread believe. (According to the poll)

P.S. If there is a mistype anywhere in there point it out and ill fix it.

 

I see the same argument going in circles over and over again. I don't really see any pertinent argument anymore. The Mothership, as its name implies, is obviously larger and more powerful than the Carrier, because, heck, the Carrier isn't called the Mothership, now is it?

Now, usually, the "Mothership" is a singular unit. There's only one. Not two, not three. So if you're going to stick to the name, you should only have one.

I think Kerwyn made the point, if in a confused and jumbled way. The Protoss are all about having one unit be able to face 3-4 of the enemy alone. That means that usually the Protoss don't have 2 or 3 different armies or groups. They gather their strength from being one solid wall of fighters. Therefore, the Mothership in its original state plays well into this theme of the "group mentality."

Giving them a number of weaker units simply doesn't make sense in the race's overall gameplay strategy. One very powerful unit that can be launched against an enemy one at a time with an array of supporting units would give the Protoss an extra edge when needed, but not overwhelm the enemy too much.

Basically this argument really is pointless as Blizzard is going to do what they want.

But I can tell you my vote, and that is to leave the unit in its original state which fit the Protoss race much better.

 

Ok, Jone. I understand what you're saying, and frankly, if they do find a way to make it happen in a fun way, it's still all good. I would very much prefer it as reproducible unit still. It's my personal preference, based on what I think is going to be like playing in both possible scenarios. We really don't know, just like you pointed out. But thanks for posting your arguments nevertheless.

In response to LordKerwyn, I'll have to use my examples. Take a group of Hydras, a group of Zerglings, and a group of Zerglings and Hydras. Put them against zealots. Who would fare better in your opinion? Hydras have the upper-hand in damage-dealing, while zerglings have more HP per cash spent. So lets analyze groups in which same amounts of cash were spent:

-Zerglings vs. Zealots: Zerglings will last longer than hydras, as they have more units and sum of HP than Hydras. But they take much more dmg to kill, as they cannot focus fire, and cannot hit from afar (also receiving dmg while they atk the Zealots)

-Hydras vs. Zealots: they do more dmg than zerglings, on the account that they can attack before being reached by the Zealots, and can overcome armors better: 1 single bigger blow of 10 only gets armor deduction once, while 2 zerglings make 2 atks of 5, getting armor deduction twice. They can also focus fire better, what will enable them to kill one Zealot faster than a zergling, as they have to spread among the targets for spatial reasons. But they have less HP, and less units as they cost far more than zerglings.

-Hydras and Zerglings vs. Zealots: zerglings will last longer, and will be ahead. If they go on front, they'll act as meat shield for the hydras to do their dmg and reduce the Zealot numbers faster than a full ling group. While the Zealots attack the lings, you'll be taking benefit from both the higher HP from the lings, and the higher-focused dmg of the Hydras. The combination is better than the full group of the same.

I remember that my scout groups would get heavily damaged when facing photon cannons by themselves. But in higher numbers and focused, the cannons, even in same proportions, would harm them less. It's because together they would destroy cannons so fast, that their numbers would decrease much faster than the scouts, helped by their superior numbers, which made it too difficult to direct the cannon's dmg to be more effective. Thus, dieing faster, they would do less dmg, and the outcome would be different.

So to that math question you asked me: it depends! Even if all the "power values" added were 24, the 9 group could perhaps beat with ease all of the sixes, and unbalance the fight. This is just hypothetical, like the math problem you proposed. But just as the scouts can have a diferent outcome if they're in a better group, so can the MS group fare better than expected and result in a non-arithmetical outcome. Afterall, math does help, but the problems in Starcraft do not resume to that. You gotta see beyond the math, and into the 'emerging properties' that I mentioned from ecology.

 

I think i have said it atleast 3 times but im going to try again and state my opinion as plain as possible. The numbers dont matter. The theme of a unit and race is all that matters because as long as something starts out as a reasonable idea it can be balanced. The is no reason to butcher the theme of a unit to make it mesh better with the balancing as long as the original idea of the unit can be balanced.

It doesnt matter if it takes longer to balance because Blizzard is going to take as much time as they need anyways. And this applies to all units not just the Mothership because if every unit has a great theme that goes great with its race's theme the game as a whole is gonna be alot more fun and interesting.

And if it isnt obvious how this opinion fits with the Mothership here it is. The original idea of the Mothership was great and it fit the Protoss theme exceptionally well. When the Mothership was nerfed so a player could have more than one without it being overpowered the theme of the original Mothership was butchered and the way the Mothership fit with the Protoss theme was butchered as well.

 

Uhh i think some one is a little angry? nahh just kidding, of curse i havent played the game and obviously the first demo no one ever is going to play that one again, but yeah i can say that the old ship was "better" acording to my likes or dislikes, but as i told you and you correctly pointed out, we cant use logic here, it just speculation, etc. But let me get this reaaaaaaaaaaaally simple ok? here we go

Sagathox: Wow... that mothership from the blizzcon sure is weak... i liked the old one better, they shouldn´t make it this weak it COULD be balanced but STILL remain a MOTHERSHIP (new cool super unit concept that the most people loved).

and, as far as i understand, you dont think that a super unit can be balanced, because with everything (add some sarcasm here please) we have seen, there is no way that blizz can balance protoss, terran and zerg, and still making it a one per player unit, then i say...

Sagathox: Just wait a little! we haven´t seen everything, we havent seen any other possible tweaks from blizzard to the mothership, don´t be so negative dude! lol.

you get my point? oh, and as for this:

It's really amusing how you criticize me and just afterwards do exactly the same. Are only good the posts that agree with you? lol

Wow Eye_Carumba! that was hell of a good post!... happy man? (no for real to be honest i really like your posts, you are standing in the minory as the only one against (well you know what i mean) many who like the old mothership, so dont be like that man keep the good posts.

Oh and as Joneagle_X said, this is just getting tired, just the same ideas circling around.

 

Well, then it's good that we finally got to the point of personal preferences, where everyone really is entitled to have their own. In the end, perhaps, ppl might still have a little hope that Blizzard is doing changes based on public opinion, and that she's reading whatever we write. Just like you guys said, let's chill out and wait for it. Everything in the game so far I liked a lot, and whatever changes they make, I'm sure will be for the greater good too. Perhaps in 2 weeks, on august 24, Games Convention, they make new announcements, and give us new things to argue about without knowing what we're saying. ;-)

 

Dang~~ well said. Didn't know you had it in ya LOL.

Sarcasm? You make me laugh. Even your rebuttal just say the same thing. Let me tell you this again and for the last time, as it seems that you are incapable of grasping facts thrown at you yet you are the master of the sidestep. And let me adopt you method of keeping it straight and simple, although I doubt it would help much.

Mass producible MS is completely different from the arbiter. You are just assuming that for yourself because you read "cloaking field," but that is an incorrect assumption. The arbiter had no offensive capabilities, I've already went into detail to explain that. The mass producible MS however, is basically a specialized combat unit, read: offensive capabilities. Even the one active spell it has is just to do damage. So, the mass producible MS overlaps the carrier, but the old arbiter did not.

Be careful not to trip on your own poorly constructed sarcasm on your way out.

 

I think that they have entirely the wrong concept for the Mothership. I think they should merge the MS and the carrier. The Mothership should be like a super powerful carrier (that is very expensive but you can get more than one), with some cool new abilities. Some ideas for abilities:

Scatter Bomb: A heavy area affect ground attack with long cooldown.

Shield: Creates shield that prevents units (friendly or enemy) from entering or leaving a large area around the MS, or attacking units that are in that area. Units withing the shield cannot attack units outside the shield. The MS cannot move while using this ability.
(The primary use of this ability would be to trap small numbers of enemy units within the shield where they cannot leave or get support, or provide a chance for your units to escape).

Warp: Allows the MS to instantly travel to any point within pylon power. However, this ability would take a few seconds to activate, so it would be inefficient for traveling short distances.

Docking Bay: 5 Pheonixes or 2 Warp-Rays could dock in the MS and be taken with a Warp.

Self-Destruct: The MS would self-destruct, destroying any air units in a wide range around the MS, and damaging ground units. This ability would take a short while to activate (maybe 7 seconds), so it would be hard to use on an already dying MS.


Some other ideas: The MS would be so expensive that it would be difficult to get more than 2 or 3. MS would be able to build Fighters (Anti-Air), Bombers (Anti-Ground), and (with upgrade) Interceptors (hits air and ground). MS would also not look like the retarded floating city. Something more like the Homeworld Mothership would be cooler: http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/Homeworld/homeworld4.jpg.

This is very different from the Blizzard concept and I know that a lot of people wont like it, but I think it is a more interesting unit, and will be easier to make balanced so that it is a good unit without taking over the game.

 

I actually like the idea Daduffian but the Mothership should stay as a super unit or make a hard cap of 2-3 instead of 1 so there is no counter issues. Also the protoss need a different capital ship besides the mothership because of the cost that would come with any "good" Mothership. Also the carrier is an iconic unit like the marine and should stick around the only thing that really needs to be done with the carrier is give it some kind of option ( like the yamato/plasma torpedos) ability the carrier isnt actualy any stronger my suggestion is give the carrier the option of 2-3 different kinds of interceptors like you already mentioned.