What would you change?

Well, we get like... a few seconds of music in a few of the trailers and other videos.

 

A few seconds of musics from the cinematics, not the game. (If you watch some of the WWI 2008 videos, they were using Warcraft III music then.)

As for art, that's so difficult to agree on. I want to avoid arguments where I say the new carrier looks great, the second person says it looks like a goat's skull, the third person says it's just a rip off of the tempest, etc.

 

Making changes to the little music we have heard would be foolish.

@Kimera. Yeah, art preference differs from person to person... But isn't it the same when discussing game play/balance? Not all people want the old Colossus beam back, for instance. Wanting to change art is as valid as wanting to change abilities, so don't hesitate to say what you feel about the aesthetics.

 

However, people can discuss why they think the old attack or new attack is better. It may involve art as well, but it'll probably also involve functionality.

 

I didn't discuss aesthetics so much because Blizzard hasn't let us down with that so far. Just look at the new Zerg updates!

If I had to have things changed though, most of it would be Zerg buildings. Make 'spikes' rising from the Lair and Hive resemble those from SC1, redesign the Baneling Nest, redesign the Infestor Pit so it actually looks like a pit, make the Greater Spire look more like the SC1 equivelent, make the Spore Crawler less spikey and more spore-y, change the the look of the Spine and Spore Crawler's "rooted down" position (don't just use the visual for the burrow hole). Redesign the Lurker to look more like a Lurker (and retain some visual traits from the Hydralisk), Redesign the Swarm Guardian so it looks more solid (I hate how it's covered in balloons right now), and redesign the Broodlings. everything else is just polishing.

Protoss - polish the Dark Pylon, redesign the Null Circuit (assuming they planned on using the Robotics Support Bay model permanently)

Terran - Make the Starport look less toy-like, bring back the Merc Haven in place of the Shadow Ops. I'm sure they can come up with another bar design, one that doesn't scream "Hey, I'm waaay to colorful to be a campaign building!!"

On the note of buildings, would I be correct in assuming Blizzard will put all scrapped buildings in the Map Editor along with scrapped units?

 

Why? The Shadow Ops and Ghost Academy are way cooler and more military fitting.

Yeah, they will put all scrapped everything and anything in the editor.

 

I just loved the Merc Haven model. Besides, a military base has to have a canteen somewhere right? At the very least, I'd like to see the models they're currently using for the Ghost Academy and Shadow Ops.


Scrapped anything and everything, you say? F*ck yeah, we're gonna have SO many toys to play with!

 

@ original poster, I laughed when I read you would change a few select things and then reworked nearly every unit in the game lol. I do agree with most but not the idea of giving hatcheries supplies, that gives them too much of an advantage, it would be like barracks or warp gates giving out supplies, it would make it far to easy for the zerg to mass, which they are already the best at.

The thing that I look at starcraft and wish to change honestly is heroes, make them creatable from a select building, just make them expensive but make them a bigger part in the game, there should be some kind of commander on the battlefield that would change the tide in a fight, or drastically change the fight if the commander fell. I do like the idea from WC3 where you were able to learn skills with levels, but do not allow them to resurrect, it should be a brutal blow to an enemy when you kill their hero. I can see where they kind of tried to do that with the Terran Battlecruiser, but not quite right.

 

The idea was to then be able to reduce the number of Overlords. It's not as though they would have the same number of Overlords as they would have otherwise, plus the supply given by the Hatcheries. They would be at no more of an advantage than if they purely had Overlords, the only difference being that they wouldn't be massed and clumped all throughout the base. Increasing the supply they, themselves, provide would not be advisable as then taking out a single Overlord or two could seriously set back a Zerg player. I see giving Hatcheries supply as a way of reducing the total number of Overlords, thus allowing them to viably become Detectors again, removing any need for the dreaded Overseers.

 

Ah, I see your point now, I agree with loosing the dependence of overlords/overseers I just don't think it's the right idea to use hatcheries seeing as how that would also serve to drastically increase their larva population and give them supplies. It just seems like it'd create more problems then it would solve.

 

That would only be the case if people still built the same number of Overlords as they otherwise would have, which they obviously wouldn't. There's no problem with the Hatchery itself providing supply, just as there's no problem with Command Centres or Nexuses providing supply. If a Zerg player needs more supply, they're not going to go and build a Hatchery. The supply provided by Hatcheries only lessens the needs for Overlords as the Zerg player expands. They wouldn't end up with more, or less, than they would otherwise have. The only difference would be he number of Overlords, which would be lessened. It's no different to if a player built both a Hatchery and a Overlord, only they wouldn't physically be given the Overlord, which would be advantageous to Zerg players without having any significant effect of the balance of the races.

I hope that helps, it's just that I'm not really sure on what problems you're suggesting it would create.

Oh and in future, please do not quote the person above you. Being new, you might want to check out the Forum Rules.

 

Thanks for the tip

The problem I'm referring to is that the reason that Zerg have only one building to build units is because it can make three units at the same time. No other race can do that. If you give that same building the ability to provide say 8 supplies then your doing three things to unbalance the Zerg you are over protecting their supply line, your giving them even more incentive to build lots of hatcheries, and your expanding their resource gathering center at the same time. It's like giving a pylon a few thousand hit points, the ability to to make units and accept resources. The reason it doesn't unbalance the Terran or Protoss is because you cannot build anything other than workers at a Nexus or Command Center, at a Hatchery you can build any unit.You said that it would only serve to reduce the number of overlords but the only way to reduce the number of overlords, substantially anyway would be to build more hatcheries.

 

You can do that in the map editor. (And yes, levelable heroes will be possible in the map editor.)

 

Good to know for the map editor, you know anything about levelable heroes other then Kerrigan for the campaign(s)?

 

No, there's been nothing said about lvlble characters in the campaigns. I am not even sure Blizzard confirmed that about Kerrrigan either, but rather hinted at it, or somehing. If you have a link to provide, it would be great.

 

Check the relevant FAQs: Either 18 or 22.

 

I unfortunately don't have a site source, just heard from someone on these forums that they heard Kerrigan will be levelable. Perhaps I assumed too much haha

 

Batch 22: "Chat with Devs: One of the most popular questions we get when it comes to creating UMS (User Map Settings) games or mods is: Will there be a DotA for StarCraft II? For those who are not familiar, DotA (Defense of the Ancients), is a popular UMS game created for Warcraft III. StarCraft compared to Warcraft III, does not focus on heroes as much, and heroes or units do not have the same experience gaining mechanic as Warcraft III, making it difficult to imagine how a game like DotA could be reproduced for StarCraft. Nonetheless, after chatting it up with our devs, we found out the ability to allow heroes and units to gain experience is built into the Map Editor, though it will not likely be in single player or standard multiplayer. In addition, those units can also be toggled to have the ability to carry an inventory, which is also a characteristic needed in UMS maps such as DotA. With those two additions, we can rest assured that our clever community modders can handle the rest in creating some awesome custom games."

Heroes can level up and gain levels in the map editor.

Link: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=10697501059&sid=3000#12

As for Kerrigan possibly gaining levels, see here http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/starcraft-2/918963p2.html and here http://www.giantbomb.com/news/qa-the-starcraft-ii-brain-trust/388/

I don't think it literally said she gains levels, but she does gain more powers, so her stats would certainly be changing as she does more missions.

 

WOW, that was one of the good news ive heard from this threads for a while.. i just hope we could get a grip on this game early or maybe please this year.... (I know x-mas wish is over)

 

If SC2 were designed by the fans

Hello everyone. I'd like us to discuss this...

If SC2 were designed by you (the fans), what would it be like?

• How would you have the graphics? Cartoonlike, semi-realistic, ultra-realistic? What use of lighting and colour? How unique and recognizable would the unit graphics be, and how would you do that?
  
• What buildings and units would you create new or ditch? Keep all from SC1 and add a few more? or completely reinvent the techtree?
  
• How would you evolve the story? And would you introduce a fourth race that possibly imbalances the gameplay, or stick with three tried-and-trusted well balanced races?
  
• What kind of game mechanic would you use? Simple one like SC1, or a more complex sta-str-agi kind of combat system?
  
• What would the campaign system be like? linear? non-linear? some procedural generation? need to complete one chapter before the next one is unlocked?
  
• What would your plans be for expansion sets? more units? more campaigns? or what?
  

And keep in mind that as a developer, you'd have limited resources, so you can't max out everything.


Jas