Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: The Hero/Macro Mothership

  1. #1

    Default The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Current Version

    Mothership 2.0 (Requires Gateway)
    Hitpoints: 400
    Shields: 400
    Energy: 400

    Intially has Proton Charge and Wormhole Transit and Shield Recharge
    Unique (one-at-a-time but can remake at Nexus with short rebuild time)
    No attack (since it would be too powerful early game)

    Mothership Upgrades (All upgrades are researched at Nexus)
    Energy Recharge (requires Cybernetics Core)
    Timerift (requires Twilight Council)
    Cloaking (requires Dark Shrine)
    Black Hole (requires Templar Archives)






    The Hero/Macro Mothership
    I don’t know about you guys but I liked the idea of an upgradeable queen. I am on the fence about a one of a kind unit in Starcraft. However, if we do have a one of a kind unit I would rather it feel like the player's Avatar than just a toy for Timmy (MTG reference!).

    So why not take everyone’s least favorite base buffer (Obelisk) and combine it with everyone’s most underused “I Win” button? This could be a base hero that you upgrade as the game went on. In the first stage it would fill a macro role, In the second it would gain defence and support capabilities, in the final stage it would become a formidable engine of war ready to lead your army for that final push.

    By combining the two you can give the casual players more incentive to macro and youll give the competitive players a reason to use a unit that might otherwise rarely see professional play.


    How It Could Work
    After building a cybernetics core the player could build a Mothership. If your Mothership was destroyed you could rebuild it (short build time). Upon reaching Stargate you could upgrade your mothership to Tier 2. You then could also upgrade 2 more abilites. Tier upgrades and Research Upgrades carry over if you rebuild your mothership and the mothership does not lose abilties when it upgrades.


    Tier Levels and Abilities
    Tier 1 (Requires Gateway)
    Proton Charge, Wormhole Transit, No Attack

    Tier 2 (Requires Cybernetics Core)
    Gains Attack, Increased Hitpoints, Increased Shields, Increased Energy
    Tier 2 Researchable Upgrades: Shield Recharge, Time Rift

    Tier 3 (Requires Fleet Beacon)
    Gains Cloaking, Increased Attacks, Increased Hitpoints, Increased Shields, Increased Energy, Increased Speed
    Tier 3 Researchable Upgrades: Argus Link (Energy Recharge), Black Hole


    New Lore and Visuals
    The way I have it pictured you warp in a "Star Relic" as your Tier 1 Mothership. When you upgrade to Tier 2 the three ring pieces would warp in around the Star Relic "core" making it into a "Mothership" Finally at Tier 3 you could Warp-in heavy dark silver armour over the unit making it a "World Destroyer".

    Star Relic


    Mothership


    World Destroyer Color Scheme
    Would be circular like Mothership but more heavily armoured and ominous.


    For the lore I would change it so the "Star Relic" core is an ancient Xel'naga device from the protoss golden age. This Star Relic is capable of fusing Kahla and Void energy into a Negative Sun contained in its core. As the protoss base grows the Kahla forces can warp in machinary that can utilize the Star Relic to regenerate shielding and even alter time. Finally when the protoss base has reached its zenith the Dark Templar forces can augment the the Star Relic with Argus Energy technology and the power to collapse space itself.






    You may now begin screaming “No Blademasters!”
    Last edited by ArcherofAiur; 11-03-2009 at 01:38 AM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Sounds reminiscent of the Monolith from DoW.

    I like it, i think its a good idea.

  3. #3

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    A single mothership never made it a hero, just a balance mechanic, because a motherships power scales ridiculously. Making a mothership is still a huge tactical choice, investing a ton of money into a unit that is rather cost ineffective and immobile.

    By making a mothership early game, and tieing macro mechanics into it, you essentially force a mothership early game, thus limiting early game diversity. A true "hero" unit. One of the biggest issues in WC3 was lack of dynamic build switches, which was partially tied to a rigid hero system.

    tl;dr

    No Blademasters!

  4. #4

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Quote Originally Posted by newcomplex View Post
    A single mothership never made it a hero, just a balance mechanic, because a motherships power scales ridiculously. Making a mothership is still a huge tactical choice, investing a ton of money into a unit that is rather cost ineffective and immobile.

    By making a mothership early game, and tieing macro mechanics into it, you essentially force a mothership early game, thus limiting early game diversity. A true "hero" unit. One of the biggest issues in WC3 was lack of dynamic build switches, which was partially tied to a rigid hero system.

    tl;dr

    No Blademasters!

    Notice that the tech placement of the Hero/Macro Mothership is the exact same as the Obelisk. And that the Tier 3 version is the same as the current Mothership.
    Last edited by ArcherofAiur; 11-01-2009 at 07:24 PM.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,102

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Don't like the idea, one MShip works fine

  6. #6

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    I don't even have to read Archers posts to know this is one of the worst ideas ever.

    Let me guess, he wants the Mothership to act like the Obelisk or something and cast PC?

    Do I actually have to list all the ways that is complete fail?

  7. #7

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur View Post
    Notice that the tech placement of the Hero/Macro Mothership is the exact same as the Obelisk. And that the Tier 3 version is the same as the current Mothership.
    Right. But the obelisk is a building which is exclusively a APM sink, if mandatory, while the mothership is a highly situational super-expensive endgame unit. The two should not be merged.

    Why did you even post this if you already knew the most direct counter-argument? No heroes.

    By giving a mothership proton charge, you a) Force its production, and b)Forced to keep it alive or suffer severe economic loss in addition to the loss of its cost+its usage as a offensive unit. It completely restructures the dynamic of protoss lategame play. To that of a hero centric playstyle. Which is bad. The current mothership is a natural yet situational unit. It has no upgrades, and it is made from a more or less crucial lategame building anyway (because like the current flight beacon, it houses upgrades for all protoss air including dropships). Obviously, its bad to loose a 400 mineral unit, but their is no need to make another unless you need its abilities. In other words, a powerful, expensive and situational unit. Its status as a "hero" is no more valid then simply as a crude yet effective balance restraint-5 black holes would be retarded OP, to the point of "insta win"

    Your solution means the entire protoss economic plan (which I'm assuming would be buffed to compensate for the fact that you can only have one) is dependent on a unit. That unlike the zerg queen, can be used lategame for anything else other then a APM sink.
    Last edited by newcomplex; 11-01-2009 at 07:46 PM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Quote Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid View Post
    I don't even have to read Archers posts to know this is one of the worst ideas ever.

    Let me guess, he wants the Mothership to act like the Obelisk or something and cast PC?

    Do I actually have to list all the ways that is complete fail?
    lol but no. You can list how this fails though.

    I don't hate or like this idea. No it's not like heroes from wc3 and no it wouldn't remove the diversity in b/o but you know the zerg already have the queen and I don't like the fact that 2 races would have a similar unit (similar by the fact that you always build it and have somewhat the same role). I'm neutral on this.

  9. #9

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Don't really like this for gameplay reasons. Besides, why should a unit that has "Ancient" emphasized on it be upgradeable? If it was "Channeling" the abilities of the buildings in your base, that would be better...

  10. #10

    Default Re: The Hero/Macro Mothership

    Quote Originally Posted by sandwich_bird View Post
    lol but no. You can list how this fails though.
    I refer back to my editorial; a section entitled "APM Sinks." Specifically, the portion about profit.

    If PC, cast from anything (Obelisk, Mothership, w/e), provides good gains from its use, it will always be used. If it does not, it will never or rarely be used. If you have a single Obelisk casting PC, and PC proves to have a high profit margin, you will always cast PC to the exclusion of all other abilities. This applies to the Mothership as well. If you have a single Mothership casting PC, and PC proves to have a high profit margin, you will always cast PC (and Wormhole Transit to get from base to base faster) to the exclusion of all other abilities.

    Essentially, you're turning the Mothership into the Obelisk. It will remain in the base, with its only advantage over the Obelisk being that it has more HP and can attack, if the base is attacked.

    And if the profit margin of PC is too low? It'll never use PC and the whole thing will still be pointless.

    Essentially, this solves absolutely nothing. The problem is with PC, not the unit it is cast from.
    Last edited by DemolitionSquid; 11-01-2009 at 08:10 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Mothership Time Bomb
    By ragsash in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-09-2009, 08:06 PM
  2. SC:L Hero Contest
    By Gradius in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 08-12-2009, 07:46 PM
  3. Arbiter vs Mothership Poll
    By ArcherofAiur in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 10:29 AM
  4. Revamping the Mothership
    By Perfecttear in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-24-2009, 11:25 AM
  5. [suggestion] MotherShip replacement
    By MaybeNextTime in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-12-2009, 09:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •