A mission based on rescuing Warfield?

Co-op Missions Discussion
Which is based off that cutscene in WoL. It's an epic FMV cutscene that I still watch over and over to this day. First half is a timed event where you'd need to get to him quickly. 2nd half is you need to defend that position while waiting out the timer. Closest thing we have is Dead Of Night, but I liked it enough that I'd welcome another variation of it.

Also, it may clash if they decide to release Warfield as a CO, but.. 'details'. Otherwise, it could be swapped with rescuing someone else, and still open Warfield as a commander.
I absolutely love this idea. New missions are always needed & this seems like both a workable backstory and an original enough mechanic to not overlap with existing missions too much.
Also, what would a Warfield commander entail? Just curious if you/anyone else had any ideas
03/12/2019 12:26 AMPosted by ackmondual
FMV
I haven't heard anyone use that term in years, probably since the last days of the N64.

I don't know much about computer graphics (outside of GPU hardware) but I'm sure SC2 cutscenes like the one you are referring to are real-time rather than FMV.

Anyway, the mission idea is a good one. Any new map would be good right now.
03/12/2019 05:24 PMPosted by Volsarex
I absolutely love this idea. New missions are always needed & this seems like both a workable backstory and an original enough mechanic to not overlap with existing missions too much.
Also, what would a Warfield commander entail? Just curious if you/anyone else had any ideas


Based on the Heart of the Swarm campaign, I could imagine a Gorgon Battlecruiser as either a calldown, or even a very expensive permanent unit.

To be different than 'Call in the Fleet' from H+H, the Gorgon could behave like in the campaign. You could control where it goes, and it just fires at everything in range until it's duration runs out. Might give it health as well, but it would be higher than Raynor's Hyperion (as calldown), and similiar to Sovereign Battlecruisers from H+H if it's a permanent (unique) unit.

Since he had his own fortress on Char, he could also have a few defensive tricks up his sleeves. Units should be above average, similiar to Nova. Let them have the Special Forces skins for example. Maybe give a few units new attacks, for example all Siege Tanks currently behave the same, as in they have the same animations for non-siege and siege, just tweaked numbers. Maybe Warfield's tanks would, I don't know, use fire attacks or something. Also, Warhounds, Diamondbacks and Predators. Note: Please make Predators worthwhile.

Still leaving Umojan stuff open in favor of Valerian. But if he's not planned to be a commander anyway, Warfield as the Dominion general might as well get Umojans, even if they're apparently independent from them.

Oh and please, macro. Don't give him free supply. Don't take away Supply Depots and the need for actual base building. More macro than Tychus, Zeratul (lol) and Nova please.
no. he might become a commander and as such, being a mission objective is not compatible with that.
03/13/2019 11:16 AMPosted by andreasasp
no. he might become a commander and as such, being a mission objective is not compatible with that.
That's why I left the option open for rescuing some other important character in the Sc universe instead. Heck, it doesn't even need to be a Terran character. We've had plenty of Missions where the COs are trying to help Protoss characters achieve objectives. For an interesting change in pace, we could even try to help out a Zerg character! (They've been the scapegoats, although TBF, DoN and Miner Excavation had you pitted against Infested Terran).

On a related note, would you be against someone like Stetman being a commander since he's already a character in Mist Opportunities?

03/12/2019 05:24 PMPosted by Volsarex
Also, what would a Warfield commander entail? Just curious if you/anyone else had any ideas
There are quite a few suggestions already in the forums here (as well as the rest of the internet). Too many to link.

That said, Warfield himself could be a hero level unit, as he was on the frontlines. If so, could make him a slower hero Marine with inferior stats (inferior for a hero level), but make up for it with other abilities. He seems to be quite the inspirational leader, so even though he may not be a "top notch" fighter (on account that he seems to be old for a combat person, and got pulled out of retirement), perhaps give him buffs that boost other units, buildings, abilities, and perhaps even enable some unique spells/options if he's not around (ie. he got killed and needs to revive).

If nothing else, I'd find it hilarious and awesome if he could actually [I]punch[/I] enemy units. :D It does a modest amount of damage, and can stun them for a bit (barring units that are naturally immune to stun).
he is not technically a character, just a quest giver. if they make him a commander, they can add dialogue to him to reflect him being a commander when someone plays as him, otherwise he still uses his current dialogue. a mission that involves rescuing one character is however too weak. there is already a series of guard missions as well. we need missions that is different from what we already have.
03/13/2019 11:16 AMPosted by andreasasp
no. he might become a commander and as such, being a mission objective is not compatible with that.

I disagree....a mission objective is compatible with a commander (his forces are coming to rescue him)
A mission objective wouldn't be compatible with a hero unit, but most commanders don't have hero units

And I think rescue is unique because it would involve 2 stages, 1 stage fight to reach them
2 stage hold out
Warfield should not be a commander. But not because he is dead (who cares about that now?). He must not be a commander because he is an idiot. Proof:
1. Launched an incoordinated invasion on Char, with no plan how to get a foothold on the planet. "Some invasion" (c) Kerrigan. His only good decision there was to give command to Raynor.
2. HotS mission "Fire in the Sky" is the core of his stupidity and lack of understanding of strategy. No decisions except "Send another gorgon".
3. Old soldiers. Continuing mistakes of underestimating the enemy and lack of flexibility lead to quite predictable result.
I'd imagine Warfield to be a heavy assault commander. But we already have a mech commander in Swann and H&H have the superior airforce so IDK which niche he could still fill in.
Warfield should not be a commander. But not because he is dead (who cares about that now?). He must not be a commander because he is an idiot. Proof: ...

If you bring in gameplay contrivances, Amon is an idiot who calls in his units at the same location even when you build thirty turrets there (and has bronze-tier micro) and Tychus is the strongest warrior in all of creation.
03/13/2019 06:45 PMPosted by Koetetsu
I'd imagine Warfield to be a heavy assault commander. But we already have a mech commander in Swann and H&H have the superior airforce so IDK which niche he could still fill in.


I always imagined him to be a siege-and-fortify style commander, with emphasis on bunkers, disposable wall type buildings, and the ability to quickly deploy and fortify an area with his units.
Love the idea for the mission. I think we need more maps and this sounds like a great addition. I like the two-fold style of trying to get to him and then holding for evac.
weak concept.
03/19/2019 04:46 PMPosted by andreasasp
weak concept.
What a dumb post this is.

The least you should do is state your reasoning as to why you think it is so. But knowing what you tend to post on this forum, it's hardly a surprise you are unable to do that.
i already posted a larger post about it earlier.
03/20/2019 02:35 AMPosted by andreasasp
i already posted a larger post about it earlier.
Here's what you said:
03/13/2019 11:35 AMPosted by andreasasp
a mission that involves rescuing one character is however too weak. there is already a series of guard missions as well. we need missions that is different from what we already have.
Which also doesn't explain why you think it's a weak concept.
most missions includes multiple targets(void slivers, void shards, datacores, evacuation ships, harvesting bots, infested structures, void trashers, balius parts). a mission that involves rescuing somebody is just one target.
03/20/2019 08:08 AMPosted by andreasasp
most missions includes multiple targets(void slivers, void shards, datacores, evacuation ships, harvesting bots, infested structures, void trashers, balius parts). a mission that involves rescuing somebody is just one target.
So? Chain of Ascension and Temple of the Past both involve just one subject for the primary objective. By your logic, these would be considered "weak" maps.

There is nothing to say that mission objectives must involve multiple targets.

Quality of a map should be judged on its overall design not by quantity for the primary objective. What you are doing is essentially judging a book by the number of pages it contains.
temple of the past also involves killing void thrashers which is a considerable threat to the temple. chain of ascension requires the destruction of multiple hybrids and parts of the enemies base.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum