TIER 2 system for base defenses.. yes upgrades. or attributes for base defenses.

I SAY A TIER 2 system for the phase canons! it looks so weak. change the model when you upgrade them. its for more defensive purposes as units now are raiding and killing workers like hell which sucks! is this how starcraft 2 is supposed to be played now completely? kill workers kill worker kill workers to win? is that all? well almost all screenshots shows units raiding base and killing workers (and 3 to 5 canons and turrets are still gay). with all this units, cliff walkers, cloak bombers, warp in technology, siege ultimate, etc. i say base defenses should be stronger. so upgrade for base defenses like canons and turrets is GOOD, increase attack and damage than creating more of them which is not really a good strat in pro games, also it decrease the free space on you base. also with stronger base defense you go for the tier 3 units like the bc to deal with them not swarms of level 1 units (now tier 3 units will be usefull now as they can tank). you get what i mean? yah base raiding is a must and inevitable in starcraft, but it should be countered effectively. even pro games dont build a lot of canons. hhmm. let the unit battles decide the game on most part.

im going to bnet and blizzforums and tell them about this.


i just find the current base defenses (canons turrets bunkers etc.) not enough. and i say defense should be as balance with offense too in sc2. NOT offense is the best defense. yah you can build more units what if the enemy attacks your unguarded(only 2 to 3 canons) base expansion then you need to pull back your force or also raid the enemy base expansion etc. sc2 should focus more on unit battles and base raidingworkers killing should not be done regularly(well if there is already an upgrade canons etc guarding the your opponent base.).

i believe this adds new mechanics and strategies in starcraft 2. as well as tier 3 units will be more in actions.

ATTRIBUTES for base defenses.

ive also been thinking about attributes for base defenses. like another protoss base defense which has hardened shield(less damage against siege attacks) but is vulnerable against to light damage and has long range attack with low damage.

another one is a zerg aerial building base defense(can only be attack by anti air). and many more possibilities.

a terran laser canon that has a firing long cooldown. and can only be build near science lab etc...

yah something attributes like this that make base defenses have characteristics and advantages and disadvantages too.

with this kind of base defenses with attributes you will go saying something wow this guy is tough as nails. its hard to crack down hes defense etc. this is guy is the superb defense specialist etc.

sorry about the workers killing comment i added here. ^^

 

Killing someones workers to ruin there economy and thus outproduce them is a perfectly fine strategy.

As for multiple tier static defenses, I don't like the idea. Static defenses are not meant to be able to destroy lots of units on their own. The main focus of the game is to get an army. It's army vs. army not army vs. static defenses.

Now everyone feel free to be a **** and pounce on me for having an opinion that isn't "WOW thats a great idea"

 

As far as having a flying building whose only purpose is to defend, why not just get a regular flying unit. A regular air unit could move, whereas the building is stuck there. In that case it really doesn't have any advantage over a regular air unit; it doesn't build or research anything.

 

Killing workers is fun. Nothing as satisfying as blowing up 9 probes with a single scarab. Not only that, but also microing the reavers and the shuttle to achieve maximum damage is a really nice thing to do. Attacking supply lines is a strategy as old as war itself.
If you commit a mistake, like not protecting your workers, its fair for the enemy to make you pay. Makes the game more intense. Nothing as boring as a super defense waiting for an enemy attack through the front gate.

 

whats the advantage of having an air flying base defense.... well ONLY AIR UNITS CAN ATTACK IT. thats it... its an adavantage if your enemy dont build air units to siege your base assuming also that the air buildings attack ground.

@paragon. yah i know its a part of the game, but it seems like its going to happen all the time in sc2.. and its like who kills the workers first or cripple completely the enemies economy wins.
so there would be no units battle for most part. let the unit battles decide the winner.

having GOOD UPGRADED BASE DEFENSES allows you defend well against enemy BASIC siege units even cheap shots on your workers will be lessen. thats the most important thing. its a good thing as the gameplay will varry time to time and all units will be obviouslu use.

I SAY DEFENSE SHOULD BE BALANCED AS OFFENSE IN STARCRAFT 2. my point is some players wants to play defense etc.

 

well I usually try to completely bypass any defenses and land a large ground force of tanks and goliaths near their minerals. Siege all the tanks and keep the goliaths close by for support. Having base defenses that can out range siege units would be incredibly bad because it takes away the point of siege units.

 

Re: TIER 2 system for base defenses.. yes upgrades. or attributes for base defen

Well, and isnt the Planetary Fortress a super powerful defense?

 

Sorta. Not nearly as much as what zeratul11 seems to be hoping for. But yeah, if you want to play defensive in SC2 zeratul11, play as terran.

 

PF cant hit air. and costs 400minerals for the CC, then probably 150/150 for the upgrade.

 

If you wanna protect the workers, then the CC is always going to be there, so forget about the 400 minerals. Cant attack air? Well, place some turrets. The real danger for the workers comes from land units like reapers, vikings, colossus and drops, so the anti ground is all you need.

 

Re: TIER 2 system for base defenses.. yes upgrades. or attributes for base defen

I think that harassing enemy worker line is a valid strategy. Blizzard doesn't want us players to turtle in our base and build a big army and send them in. Blizzard is intending to create a game where there is constant battle and harassment every moment. Therefore, when the game starts, you have to be on a alert the whole game.

If base defense is too strong, then the game of Starcraft won't be as deep and therefore, won't have as much and diverse strategy. Everyone would just turtle up and build up 200 pop and fight it out. It would happen every single game and would therefore become tedious after awhile. If the base defense is too strong, no one is ever going to build any early game units or harass your worker line or do anything fancy because it won't work against super defense mechanism. It will just be a race to build up Tier 3 200 pop units and fight it out. Wouldn't that be very boring? That is why Blizzard doesn't intend to make defense very strong because they want the game to have a lot of depth in strategies. Blizzard wants us players to be alert on the enemy the whole game once we push the start button. Therefore, strengthen base defense not only destroys the whole depth of strategy in SC, but it would also make the game too linear.

 

If we have good base defenses then we would need artillery THATS ALL.

 

the tier 2 system for base defenses are for late games.

 

Yap im agreed, its for the late games.

:thumbup: PEACE

 

Re: TIER 2 system for base defenses.. yes upgrades. or attributes for base defen

as long as it's balanced, i see no reason why not

 

Banshees. 'nough said

 

yes it can be balance. this new base defenses has weaknesses and advantages.

@ych8 im not saying that the base will be impossible to be crack with this new base defenses upgrades and attributes. it will just help lessen any base expansion cheap shots (workers killing etc.) as your opponent will think twice on doing so as for an example.

ofcourse tier 3 untis and heavy siege and can take care of this. also the aerial base defenses can be taken down easily by anti air units... so its just something new that adds up mechanics and strategies likewise.

 

Cheap shots are the best kind of shots. Because a cheap shot to the person being attacked is really just a well executed attack on a poorly defended area by the attacker. I've had plenty of "cheap shots" done to me but I don't complain about them, I learn from them.

 

Re: TIER 2 system for base defenses.. yes upgrades. or attributes for base defen

I don't think you should see it as such an isolated maneuver and judge it on whether THAT'S fun or not. You're right, killing off Probes in of itself isn't exactly fun fun fun. But the fact that you must PROTECT your miners, think strategically and not take u'r minerals area for granted while attacking the enemy adds an entire dimension to the game and gives it variety. And dimension and variety usually always makes a better game

EDIT: I agree with Paragon. I honestly don't think there's anything "cheap" about doing pretty much doing anything. I know that's kind of an extreme claim, but back when somebody first did some lurker drops to get at my miners, I just sort of chuckled, nodded my head, and remembered to put some detectors round my miners next time. I was impressed instead of some of my friends goin "Goddamn it you cheap bastard!" Another one was using a batch of Corsairs to totally own all the overlords. My friend hated me for that one. I didn't get why THAT was cheap either. Build some air defenses. Build more overlords (there's no cap to 'em). Probably part of Blizzard's strategy. I mean, what constitutes as cheap and what constitutes as finding a really great and unique strategy that puts the enemy at u'r mercy?

The only things that are 'cheap" to me are hackers, because it goes out of the bounds of what the game intended. And if something WAS indeed a matter of imbalance or what not, then the next patch will release it. That's just my take.

 

There's no point in having stronger defenses. If you weren't careful enough to defend your workers, you deserve to have them blown to pieces. Worker raids aren't cheap at all. You shouldn't have neglected defending your mineral line. Falling to a strategy frequently doesn't mean the strategy is cheap or that something's wrong with the game. It just means you need more practicce countering it.