StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void

[calapine]

It's technically not an expansion, so it deserves it's own thread....I guess?

The new Trailer is out - and it feels surprisingly low effort.


Exciting new features / lame gimmicks include:

- Archon mode - in which two players share control over one race.
- Daily Automated Tournaments
- Some sort of new co-op mode

Edit: Oh, yes...I forgot to tell you, the spice exists only on one planet in the entire universe you don't need to own the main game to play it.

[luckton]

If it's a stand-alone game, meaning that it'll have stand-alone pricing around $50-$60, then it should have stand-alone levels of content. Aside from Archon mode (which really would open it up to some interesting combos..have one person focus on the macro while another does the micro), I could give a rat's arse about multiplayer features; if the single-player content isn't as full+more as Wings of Liberty, I'll wait for holiday pricing a year or two after it comes out.

I still have yet to pick up Heart of the Swarm for that reason. $40 was just too much for me when I was only going to play half of the game, and even at $20 right now I couldn't be bothered to pick it up with WoD coming next week.

I wonder if anyone at Bliz has thought about just selling the single-player stuff by itself, and I could DLC multiplayer if I wanted to?

[Malakili]

Knowing Blizzard most of the units they showed in the multiplayer changes videos are going to be changed a ton by release after the pros get in and show them how terrible a few of the designs are (I'm looking at you Cyclone).

Anyway, I don't really ladder Starcraft anymore, but I might go back for a ladder season when this comes out if it looks good enough.  Single Player will be worth playing through but not amazing, I assume.  The Starcraft 2 story is so terrible it is kind of embarrassing.

I realize I'm one of the few people around here who actually loves classic RTS games, so yeah.

[Ironwood]

You're not.  You're just one of the few that will pay for shit.

StarCraft II was mostly shit and it was shit divided into expensive chunks of shit.

[Malakili]

You're not.  You're just one of the few that will pay for shit.

StarCraft II was mostly shit and it was shit divided into expensive chunks of shit.

Wings of Liberty single player was shit, or at least pretty bad.  Heart of the Swarm single player was substantially more fun, but had an even worse story.

For multiplayer it has been the best RTS in a decade and it isn't close.

Legacy of the Void is just going to be more of the same either way though.  I can't see any reason for people to buy this if they don't already like the previous ones.  And besides, you can play the arcade (aka Custom Games) for total free now, which is one of the draws for owning it in the first place.

EDIT: Starting the game with 12 workers is going to totally change everything about the multiplayer meta game. That is probably the most interesting thing I've heard so far about this.

[Fordel]

The sharing one race thing is actually probably a bigger deal then it seems, in terms of bringing new people into the game. Having a more experienced friend being able to cover your mistakes, or being able to show your noobish friend the best way to do things directly.

Plus the simple fact you aren't alone while you play the actual balanced version of the game.

[Malakili]

The sharing one race thing is actually probably a bigger deal then it seems, in terms of bringing new people into the game. Having a more experienced friend being able to cover your mistakes, or being able to show your noobish friend the best way to do things directly.

Plus the simple fact you aren't alone while you play the actual balanced version of the game.

I agree in principle, but I can't imagine a scenario where I actually play the game that way.  You might be right in general, but I wonder how many people really want to get into Starcraft 2 from scratch at this point regardless.  I certainly can't think of a single person I know who would make a good candidate for getting them into the game via this method.

[K9]

They seem to be trying to solve the problem of the SCII multiplayer skill curve by... adding masses more micro.

Also lurkers... They're really running out of imagination now. I thought the reason they left them out of HoTS was because they had cooler ideas or some such?

Bar the changes to the carrier (which seem wholly logical) everything else seems uninspired.

[Malakili]

Eh, Lurkers are way better designed than Swarm Hosts anyway.  They were a total lynchpin of the Brood War meta and I think a really good unit.  I don't know if they have "cooler" ideas or not, but the unit is going to make the meta substantially better in my opinion.  One of the things that SC2 has suffered from in comparison to Brood War is the propensity for "death balls" because of the lack of units that can defend choke points really efficiently (and the different high ground mechanics).  Heart of the Swarm has definitely improved that some already, but units that force more spread out battles and more stuff on the map rather than huge armies roaming around is a good thing.

I also don't think they are trying to solve the problem of SC2 skill curve.  They just pretty obviously don't see it as a problem at this point.  The solution to that problem is just not playing ladder.

[Fordel]

The biggest cause of the deathball is the one thing they can't/won't fix. The fact SC2 pathing is actually decent instead of pants on head dragoon retarded. 

[Margalis]

So the big new feature is a "shared control" checkbox?

[Malakili]

The biggest cause of the deathball is the one thing they can't/won't fix. The fact SC2 pathing is actually decent instead of pants on head dragoon retarded. 

True, but there are plenty of other things that encourage it beyond just the fact that your units don't dance instead of fight these days.  Actually another one of the notable changes is that mineral patches have only 1000 minerals each, which means you have to expand much more frequently if you want to sustain a 3 base economy.  That should also encourage a meta with less turtley death ball play. Taking, holding, and attacking expansions has always been important - obviously - but it's going to be all the more important now.

[Sir T]

So the big new feature is a "shared control" checkbox?

Which is something the original Starcraft had. At least I remember playing in a "everyone playing with shared resources and able to control everyone's units" mode.

I might pick this one up since I was always a Protoss fan in the original game and I have avoided the other ones.

[Megrim]

After going through the "new" features, I give up. I mean, I mostly gave up on Blizzard before. but this.... this is just...

[Maledict]

They seem to be trying to solve the problem of the SCII multiplayer skill curve by... adding masses more micro.

Also lurkers... They're really running out of imagination now. I thought the reason they left them out of HoTS was because they had cooler ideas or some such?

Bar the changes to the carrier (which seem wholly logical) everything else seems uninspired.

Yeah, I am worried by all the micro they keep talking about. Starcraft is already insanely intimidating to play multiplayer, adding in a new set of units all of whom are "MORE MICRO" doesn't exactly make me rush to play it...

[Malakili]

So the big new feature is a "shared control" checkbox?

The difference is that it is 2 people controlling a single "players" worth of stuff.  Shared Control is already in Starcraft 2 for 2v2 and such.  This is a "1v1" mode with shared control.  I'm not saying its a huge deal, I'm just trying to be clear on what it is.

Yeah, I am worried by all the micro they keep talking about. Starcraft is already insanely intimidating to play multiplayer, adding in a new set of units all of whom are "MORE MICRO" doesn't exactly make me rush to play it...

I don't really understand this line of thought if I'm being honest.  It's like being worried because a shooter makes you aim - it's an inherent part of the genre.  Besides, ladder is going to always be a bit tough because it's competitive -why not just queue up for unranked.  The competition is a bit easier and there is no pressure because who cares if you lose? 

[lamaros]

Who cares if you lose anywhere? Micro intensive games are just less fun for me. I like good play to be more than just furious click execution.

[Rendakor]

Having to micro your base is what killed SC2 for me, with the stupid queen larva spit thing.

[Malakili]

Who cares if you lose anywhere? Micro intensive games are just less fun for me. I like good play to be more than just furious click execution.

Good play in Starcraft is a lot more than just furious click execution. 

But I'm not having this conversation.

[Goreschach]

I don't even know why most of you people are posting about this. It sounds to me like you just want to play turn based strat games. RT implies a level of physical capability in the gameplay. This is no different from fps.

[K9]

Yeah, I am worried by all the micro they keep talking about. Starcraft is already insanely intimidating to play multiplayer, adding in a new set of units all of whom are "MORE MICRO" doesn't exactly make me rush to play it...

I don't really understand this line of thought if I'm being honest.  It's like being worried because a shooter makes you aim - it's an inherent part of the genre.  Besides, ladder is going to always be a bit tough because it's competitive -why not just queue up for unranked.  The competition is a bit easier and there is no pressure because who cares if you lose?  

Not to the extent they seem to be pushing. Classically in RTS you had your meat rock-paper-scissors type units, and then casters. They added a lot of interesting passive abilities to some of the former units with SC2, but now every other unit has an active ability. You're adding an extra level of requirement, it's not enough to position your units, assign targets, and handle the special abilities of casters, you've got to handle unfun bullshit like non-passive immortals shields. Pretty much every re-work they mentioned in their multiplayer videos entailed adding an active ability to a unit that previously had none, or turning a passive ability into an active one. It just pushes the skill cap higher, which is fine for the pro-level play, but shit for everyone else.

Dealing with one or two special abilities in your army was always part of the RTS, but now you're looking at juggling as many or more as you have unit types. That's not fun, it's just a headache, and frankly it only pushes the game further towards simple deathball type play. People don't play MMM because it's elegant or interesting, it's because it's simple and effective. I promise you that if Blizzard 'enhanced the fun' of these units my making concussive shells and marine shields active abilities you'd see those units get less play across the board.

[Malakili]

you've got to handle unfun bullshit like non-passive immortals shields.

Handling another active ability is more fun than units that are so hard counter-y. I don't know about you, but a unit that requires me to control it to be at its most effecitve makes for a lot more interesting games than a unit that just wins because math in circumstances and loses because math in others.  There will always be some of that, but something like the immortal was a bit too pushed. 

I'm not some Starcraft 2 whiz.  But the challenge is what makes it an awesome game. It's still considerably more newbie friendly than Brood War was.

[Lantyssa]

As a dirty casual I friggin' hate active abilities.

[lamaros]

you've got to handle unfun bullshit like non-passive immortals shields.

Handling another active ability is more fun than units that are so hard counter-y. I don't know about you, but a unit that requires me to control it to be at its most effecitve makes for a lot more interesting games than a unit that just wins because math in circumstances and loses because math in others.  There will always be some of that, but something like the immortal was a bit too pushed. 

I'm not some Starcraft 2 whiz.  But the challenge is what makes it an awesome game. It's still considerably more newbie friendly than Brood War was.

We get what you like. But the fact some of us like different things doesn't mean those different things have to be turn based. I'd rather win a battle because my army compisition and attack timing is better than yours, with the micromanagement of individual units to be almost negligible.

[Phildo]

+1 for not wanting to micromanage every unit in your army during a fight.  I like to set up my army guys and watch them wail on each other.

I'm a toddler, but I know what I like.

[Rendakor]

I'm not sure how SC2 is more noob friendly than BW was. Nearly every unit has an active now, as opposed to mostly just casters before.

[Samprimary]

removing the immortal's shield and replacing it with a short lived damage absorb ability just basically means that i am as much as is possible not going to bother with them, since i won't be able to justify the risk versus what i have to invest to get a couple out on the field. The tempest being ground only is also a huge, huge hit to my playstyle. The carrier change is welcomed but overshadowed by teleporting battlecruisers so

[Malakili]

I'm not sure how SC2 is more noob friendly than BW was. Nearly every unit has an active now, as opposed to mostly just casters before.

In Brood War macro took WAY more APM than Starcraft 2 does, and the active abilities of units in SC2  (that are only going to spike APM requirements in fights) pale in comparison to the constant high APM needed to just fucking build units in Brood War.

[Samprimary]

man going over these things again makes me think that unless there are some readily noticeable bread and butter upgrades to attack damage, armor, etc to a handful of protoss units, i'm not going to really have the mental overhead to protoss well anymore.

maybe it's my fault, i became a creature of habit and was super into using tempests to give me the AA oomph necessary to push with immortals and collosi, but now immortals will get pasted if i don't become an ability micro god and now for anti air I suppose I have to just do i hope i like stalkers (i dont)

wait no maybe my orbs can eviscerate their swarms with their deadly death laser rays and

.. no, no i'm boned this expansion i think

[Fordel]

I am taking full credit for the Battlecruiser warp drive, I suggested that years ago! 

Clearly my doing.

[Ingmar]

you've got to handle unfun bullshit like non-passive immortals shields.

Handling another active ability is more fun than units that are so hard counter-y. I don't know about you, but a unit that requires me to control it to be at its most effecitve makes for a lot more interesting games than a unit that just wins because math in circumstances and loses because math in others.  There will always be some of that, but something like the immortal was a bit too pushed. 

I'm not some Starcraft 2 whiz.  But the challenge is what makes it an awesome game. It's still considerably more newbie friendly than Brood War was.

We get what you like. But the fact some of us like different things doesn't mean those different things have to be turn based. I'd rather win a battle because my army compisition and attack timing is better than yours, with the micromanagement of individual units to be almost negligible.

RTSes like this do exist (Planetary Annihilation for example.)

[Rendakor]

I'm not sure how SC2 is more noob friendly than BW was. Nearly every unit has an active now, as opposed to mostly just casters before.

In Brood War macro took WAY more APM than Starcraft 2 does, and the active abilities of units in SC2  (that are only going to spike APM requirements in fights) pale in comparison to the constant high APM needed to just fucking build units in Brood War.

For Zerg that feels absolutely false. Building units seems to take way more work in SC2, since each hatchery now requires a queen injecting nonstop.

[Ingmar]

It's not that it's high APM to inject all the time, it's that you can't miss a beat.

[Rendakor]

Right. I'm not up on RTS lingo to know what that shit is called, I just know it ruined the game for me.

[lamaros]

you've got to handle unfun bullshit like non-passive immortals shields.

Handling another active ability is more fun than units that are so hard counter-y. I don't know about you, but a unit that requires me to control it to be at its most effecitve makes for a lot more interesting games than a unit that just wins because math in circumstances and loses because math in others.  There will always be some of that, but something like the immortal was a bit too pushed. 

I'm not some Starcraft 2 whiz.  But the challenge is what makes it an awesome game. It's still considerably more newbie friendly than Brood War was.

We get what you like. But the fact some of us like different things doesn't mean those different things have to be turn based. I'd rather win a battle because my army compisition and attack timing is better than yours, with the micromanagement of individual units to be almost negligible.

RTSes like this do exist (Planetary Annihilation for example.)

Not many good recent ones, unfortunately. The company behind Planetary Annihilation seems to be run pretty poorly?