StarCraft® II

What unit do u want the most in HotS?

Posts: 672
This includes any zerg/terran/protoss unit from the campaign, any scrapped units from development, and units that were in BW but not SC2.

OR, what unit would u want a complete overhaul of.

These changes would be in both ladder and campaign.

IMO, i would want a hydra overhaul. That way, it can be used efficiently vs. all races, and can be the iconic unit of the swarm like blizzard makes it our to be. But it wouldn't be OP.
Edited by CarrotJuice on 6/16/2011 3:01 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 234
In brood war, the basic all-around units were good (dragoon, hydra, terran doesn't have one) but easily out-microed. But in WoL, the all-around units aren't as easily microed against, rather, they're just bad as units (Hydra, stalker). If you also notice, each race doesn't generally have in-between units. Stalkers are light, and have low DPS, but are cheap. Immortals are heavy and powerful, but are expensive. You have to get a right mixture of them, where, regularly, you could get dragoons that would fill the role of both, and were plain massed. now, the hydra is very weak unless accompanied by roaches. Zerg players, please correct me if I'm wrong. Again, you couldn't mass JUST hydras. You would die to MMM balls or death balls.
You said that it wouldn't be OP, well, it's balanced where it is. It just has a different role than you want. I don't disagree with you, I liked making only one type of unit. But that's just not life in SC2.
Reply Quote
Posts: 75
From what I can tell from the screen shots & HotS video released the Zerg units will all be able to be buffed in the campaign to a new or otherwise novel morph. In other words every Zerg unit will have something it can turn into in the same way a ling morphs into a bling or a corruptor morphs in a Blord. Im not fully sure about this, but that is something I would like to see carry on into the multiplayer.

In particular there is a screenshot & portions of the gameplay video that describe the raptor, which may not be a morph so much as a buffed up ling. Anyway it can jump, therefore making surrounds easier & making it so the raptor does not get stuck behind roach-Hydra arcs or any other unit that may be in the way (perhaps including force fields?). That gets me excited.

I don't know that I would want an overhaul of any unit, but I'm under the impression from a blizz staff interview that an overhaul of the overseer may be coming.

Most of the things I would like for zerg are small patchable changes.
Queens should be able to transfuse themselves & on the unit bar.
You should be able to switch the minimap with the big screen.
You should be able to place nydus on the minimap.
When you hotkey an active creep tumor it should be the next spawned active creep tumor that retains the hotkey, not the inert tumor at the same spot.
Roach Hydra balls should path so that roaches surround the hydras just like Marauders do with marines.
You should be able to auto-cast unload on a nydus, so that you can be loading via rally points & the auto-casting nydus will just keep belching out units as they come.
You should have a system by which you can only unload units of a certain type from one nydus, while unloading units of another from a different one.
Reply Quote
Posts: 8
i agree with its auto cast the load/unload
Reply Quote
Posts: 672
@antibody

I don't want a hydra buff so i can ONLY use that unit, i just want the unit to be better to be more iconic like blizz makes it out to be.
Reply Quote
Posts: 253
I want the Mothership to be Overhauled (with its Planet Cracker ability, ect.)
And i want the Laviathan. Maybe make Scourge (like Carriors with Interceptors) and also make Mutas/Corrupters, just a little cheeper.
Edited by Zeratul on 6/16/2011 6:58 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 75
For protoss, possibly in LotV, I would like to see Carriers have the ability to shuttle each others interceptors. What I mean by that is say you have a player with 5 carriers. (I'm picking a big number because it helps my analogy, not because i want to see games with 5 carriers more often)
Say each of the carriers has 10 interceptors for a total of 50.
Then say three are clustered together, one is scouting about, & the 5th is in between just within its interceptor range of both the clustered three & the scouting carrier.
Then the scouting carrier runs into something & deploys it's ten interceptors.
Once all its interceptors are deployed & provided that only if the 5th carrier is in range, it then calls the 5th carriers interceptors into it's vacant hull & then deploys them.
Now the 5th carrier has all it's interceptors deployed, & if & only if it is in range of the cluster of three it can receive their interceptors & deploy them to the scout carrier until the lone scout carrier has a cloud of 50 interceptors around it, or until it's destroyed.
Each carrier would own it's own interceptors. One carrier could not make interceptors to give to another. That way you wouldn't have fast carriers with mass interceptor builds.
When the scout carrier dies, it's interceptors die with it, but the other "borrowed" interceptors would head straight home. This way the player getting attacked has a sense of what is going on.

The way i would think this would play out in actual multiplayer is that protoss would be able to get carrier as an alternative to Colossus more often, & the nature of the 'toss death ball would be very different. 3 carriers spread out would cover a wide area death-ball & be better against air. 3 colossus would cover a much smaller area in that they do not impede the gateway units so the death-ball would be smaller & better against ground. By having the carriers work together, & down a different tech path, it's not likely players would get both carriers & colossi unless they were ridiculously ahead already or the game was very mature & on a big map. Did i explain myself well?

Also for protoss I think shield regenerators should come back but not quite the same way. I think they should act on pylon/prism fields & generally improve shield regeneration on everything that is in the field area of the target pylon/prism.
To use this, the fields of the pylons/prisms should be overlapped between the target field & the shield regenerator structure. That way hyper aggressive remote prism drops, or proxy pylon warp-ins are not overly encouraged.
There should also be a pronounced graphic effect on the target pylon/prism & its area of effect as well as a graphic that indicates which direction the shield generator is in. That way the opponent has a chance to decide to back off & has a sense of what needs to be overcome.
The idea that the nexus could be the shield regenerator instead of having a separate structure might work. That way protoss would have to chose their energy usage between regen & crono, then the choice has significance & the protoss opponent might be encouraged to be aggressive to slow down crono, but not too aggressive. A hard balance of choices like that is part of the spice of the game.

The reason why I think this would be good for protoss is that it makes the protoss defense a little easier. It might give an advantage back to the PvP defender in a 4 gate without the recent 4 gate nerf. It also gives protoss an incentive to string their pylons in an overlapping manor, rather than just spray proxy pylons solely for their warp in potential. They should do both, but now they have a greater choice of reasons for outside the main pylon placement.

I think these two things together would make it easier for protoss to hold larger areas of territory. This could make a late game death-ball have to do a little less work to cover a large area & give protoss a better chance to get a sizable push out force available.
Reply Quote
Posts: 234
For protoss, possibly in LotV, I would like to see Carriers have the ability to shuttle each others interceptors. What I mean by that is say you have a player with 5 carriers. (I'm picking a big number because it helps my analogy, not because i want to see games with 5 carriers more often)
Say each of the carriers has 10 interceptors for a total of 50.
Then say three are clustered together, one is scouting about, & the 5th is in between just within its interceptor range of both the clustered three & the scouting carrier.
Then the scouting carrier runs into something & deploys it's ten interceptors.
Once all its interceptors are deployed & provided that only if the 5th carrier is in range, it then calls the 5th carriers interceptors into it's vacant hull & then deploys them.
Now the 5th carrier has all it's interceptors deployed, & if & only if it is in range of the cluster of three it can receive their interceptors & deploy them to the scout carrier until the lone scout carrier has a cloud of 50 interceptors around it, or until it's destroyed.
Each carrier would own it's own interceptors. One carrier could not make interceptors to give to another. That way you wouldn't have fast carriers with mass interceptor builds.
When the scout carrier dies, it's interceptors die with it, but the other "borrowed" interceptors would head straight home. This way the player getting attacked has a sense of what is going on.

The way i would think this would play out in actual multiplayer is that protoss would be able to get carrier as an alternative to Colossus more often, & the nature of the 'toss death ball would be very different. 3 carriers spread out would cover a wide area death-ball & be better against air. 3 colossus would cover a much smaller area in that they do not impede the gateway units so the death-ball would be smaller & better against ground. By having the carriers work together, & down a different tech path, it's not likely players would get both carriers & colossi unless they were ridiculously ahead already or the game was very mature & on a big map. Did i explain myself well?

Also for protoss I think shield regenerators should come back but not quite the same way. I think they should act on pylon/prism fields & generally improve shield regeneration on everything that is in the field area of the target pylon/prism.
To use this, the fields of the pylons/prisms should be overlapped between the target field & the shield regenerator structure. That way hyper aggressive remote prism drops, or proxy pylon warp-ins are not overly encouraged.
There should also be a pronounced graphic effect on the target pylon/prism & its area of effect as well as a graphic that indicates which direction the shield generator is in. That way the opponent has a chance to decide to back off & has a sense of what needs to be overcome.
The idea that the nexus could be the shield regenerator instead of having a separate structure might work. That way protoss would have to chose their energy usage between regen & crono, then the choice has significance & the protoss opponent might be encouraged to be aggressive to slow down crono, but not too aggressive. A hard balance of choices like that is part of the spice of the game.

The reason why I think this would be good for protoss is that it makes the protoss defense a little easier. It might give an advantage back to the PvP defender in a 4 gate without the recent 4 gate nerf. It also gives protoss an incentive to string their pylons in an overlapping manor, rather than just spray proxy pylons solely for their warp in potential. They should do both, but now they have a greater choice of reasons for outside the main pylon placement.

I think these two things together would make it easier for protoss to hold larger areas of territory. This could make a late game death-ball have to do a little less work to cover a large area & give protoss a better chance to get a sizable push out force available.


nope.
Reply Quote
Posts: 234
I'm still pushing for wraiths. The only new terran units that could really come in to play are: goliath
wraith
firebat
medic
science vessel
diamond backs

the goliath would really be just a more powerful marine, sorry nothing new there. The wraith I like, because there is no terran unit alike to it in full. imagine the banshee and viking had a baby. Awesome! the firebat...mmmm.... maybe. not sure. The medic-no. this would make MMM balls super easy to get, with barely any tech, so it could make the game really unbalanced. science vessel's main point was emp, so kinda useless now except for vehicle heal, which could be useful. Now the diamond back would be nice! It would be great for micro-intensive battles. terran has no durable factory unit that isn't super powerful and has a lot of life, but costs a lot. Goliath would fill this role, but the thor already takes it, so I say diamond back.
Reply Quote
Posts: 75
The whole point of diamond backs is that they can drive-by shoot right? Im pretty sure the old SC1 tanks could do that too, it was just weak, Can the new tanks do that? I Rarely see anything un-sieged near a fight. If tanks can shoot while moving, you don't need diamondbacks, you might just need to adjust the un-sieged tank.

I think rather than bring science vessels back you can just bring back the science facility & have that one thing have both structure & vessel properties. I think mech heal might be a bad idea but having it be a floating/detecting/fast repair bay might work.
Edited by MilkMansSon on 6/16/2011 9:07 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 181
Infested Bunker. If you don't know what that is look it up on youtube it looks cool.
Reply Quote
Posts: 472
Lurker definitely.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,899
Leaving all the SC2 units alone, if I could bring ONE unit from the SCBW and SC1 game... defiler.
Reply Quote
Posts: 78
06/16/2011 03:33 PMPosted by Antibody
the all-around units aren't as easily microed against, rather, they're just bad as units (Hydra, stalker)


STALKERS ARE BAD?????!!!!
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,393
Just new units. I liked the direction the new zerg units took in Starcraft 2, especially the corruptor and the baneling. Wasn't a big fan of the old units, though I did like the new Ultra a lot better in design. But Blizzard showed some real creativity in SC2's original unit designs, I'd like to see it go further.

Also Torrasque. I want the cargoship full of whoopass back.
Edited by Subsourian on 6/24/2011 11:33 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 244
I'm still pushing for wraiths. The only new terran units that could really come in to play are: goliath
wraith
firebat
medic
science vessel
diamond backs


Diamondbacks are the only likely unit to be added, because none of the others are new. Every other unit was in SC1 or Brood War, so they'd be bringing old units back, not adding new ones. Goliath was changed to the Viking, Wraith is now the Banshee, Firebat and Vulture got switched to make Marauder and Hellion, Medic got combined with the dropship to make the medivac, and science vessel got scrapped to make the raven.

I really don't want them to bring any old units back, except for campaign missions, because revamping on the old mechanics to make new and interesting units is part of what makes SC2 what it is. However, I could see bringing back old abilities on new units to give the ability a different connotation, such as irradiate on a new terran unit, or something to that effect.


The unit I want the most would have to be something more suited to worker harass for Protoss. Stalkers move faster than workers, but get bonus to armored, not light; Zealots can only catch workers with Charge, and only do 1-2 hits per cooldown; Dark Templar move at the same speed as workers, so they can't catch them once moved away.
Reply Quote
Posts: 80
I´d like the goliath for the multiplayer wich is way better than the useless thor, the firebat, the medic and the dragoon. Well, the dragoon maybe only because of nostalgic reasons, I think the stalker is a good replacement.

Also I´d like the Dark Archon, hehe, that is so OP.
Edited by Praetor on 6/24/2011 4:49 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 75
I was a happy to see that when SC2 came out the Ghost was fixed & didn't need science vessels to EMP anymore, the HTemplar was fixed & could use feedback instead of hallucinate, which was replacing something with little use for something with alot.

Surely the defiler was fixed as well right?
Nope the defiler was replaced altogether. The problem with the original defiler was partially that it was hard to manage. They were easy targets, slow & distinct, & they had to have their swarm & red plague manually targeted. What they were good at was turning a small group of Hydras into a powerful force & giving zerg some means to bust a fortified position in the late game. It's just that the other zerg late game options were generally better & defilers were high maintenance.

Fixing the defiler would revolve around the dark swarm ability which is conceptually a very zerg-like ability to have on the battlefield anyway. Right now the zerg multiplayer has need of a low food cost roach-hydra ball force multiplier that doesn't need the greater spire tech path.
The dark swarm could work in a number of ways.
It could be an area cast like it was originally. I don't like that idea but its there.
It could be a radius effect around the defiler that burns purple bar gradually like ghost cloak, say a large area if un-burrowed or a smaller ramp sized area if burrowed. That way the defiler could cover a ramp without obstructing it.
The ability could be just like it was before where it nullifies ranged attacks, or it could be an armor enhancer, or it could be a regeneration enhancer, or a combination of those things as well as part plague. I would say blizzard would have to experiment to find the perfect balance without making it too OP.
Mabey the defiler could be a morph from an infestor the way a B-lord is a morph from a corruptor. mabey the infestation pit would need to morph the way w spire does to a greater spire equivalent in order for the defiler to come back.
The original defiler resembled dermaptera (ear wigs), mabey the tail pincers could be able to do some sort of gradual consumption on any friendly or not unit. Like they could gradually regen health & energy equivalent to the HP they siphon off as time passes with the unit trapped in the defiler pincers to replace consumption.

Anyway, the zerg could use a fortification busting & death ball opposing buff that sits directly on the roach-hydra (as in range upgrade research & hydra den) late game tech path. The defiler could potentially be that fix.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]