View Poll Results: So, should the Mothership be changed as described?

Voters
21. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 14.29%
  • No

    18 85.71%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

  1. #11

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    Mothership could have an awesomely unique role. In Singleplayer.
    Bring back planet cracker, make it a shield battery, let it attack multiple targets.

    I really don't mind seeing Arbiter 2.0 in SC2. Arbiters were rarely used to begin with, and the Mothership isn't some game-changer that needs to be used to win.

    It's a great support unit, and I'm fine if there's only one on the field at a time. I'm not for the design decision, but hey, if it get uber spells in the game without being imba, then at least it's something different. No other race has spells so potent that it has to be limited to one unit. I don't think it needs anything more to define its uniqueness in multiplayer.

  2. #12
    The_Blade's Avatar Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,249

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Arbiters were rarely used to begin with
    You must be kidding me! Right?

  3. #13

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Mothership could have an awesomely unique role. In Singleplayer.
    Bring back planet cracker, make it a shield battery, let it attack multiple targets.

    I really don't mind seeing Arbiter 2.0 in SC2. Arbiters were rarely used to begin with, and the Mothership isn't some game-changer that needs to be used to win.

    It's a great support unit, and I'm fine if there's only one on the field at a time. I'm not for the design decision, but hey, if it get uber spells in the game without being imba, then at least it's something different. No other race has spells so potent that it has to be limited to one unit. I don't think it needs anything more to define its uniqueness in multiplayer.
    But that's sort of my point. If it's going to be Arbiter 2.0, why not just call it that? Why give it a shiny new paint job and pretend it's something entirely different? It doesn't need to be the Mothership. The Mothership could easily be a campaign exclusive where it serves as the Protoss' super unit in all its unhindered glory. After all, there are plenty of campaign exclusive units in WoL.

    The fact remains that for whatever their reasons, Blizzard seems intent on shoehorning a unit called 'The Mothership' into Protoss multiplayer. But if this is the case, it should be its own unit. At the very least, do what they did with the Dragoon's replacements (Stalkers and Immortals). Right now the Mothership's main gimmick is nearly identical to that of the Arbiter. Vortex is simply Stasis with the continued ability to lock people once cast. At least by classifying it as a building and requires resources to use its abilities, the main gimmick shifts to something else/new.
    Last edited by mr. peasant; 01-19-2010 at 08:17 PM.

  4. #14

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    It's not called Arbiter 2.0 for the same reason Phoenix is not a Scout 2.0 or Stalker is not a Dragoon 2.0. It's a spiritual successor.

    This unit is obviously still in flux so it's going to be hard to make a good argument for it, but you can see from how it was first designed that it is not just an arbiter. Only now are we seeing many abilities that make it look like an arbiter, but even then it has its differences. You can't just ignore Time Rift and the fact you can only make one of these things. We aren't even sure if this unit can attack multiple targets, nor the true price of the unit and how it's built.

    The only speculation right now is that it fills the role the Arbiter did, as a flying support spellcaster. We don't really know much beyond that. It could simply be that this is the current state of the Mothership because Blizz wants to play it safe for now and test new spells during the beta.

    Many of Warcraft 3's heroes had abilities swapped in and out many many times during the beta. Entire roles were changed and defined during the course. Even ultimate spells, the thing that defined a Hero's full potential, were changed.

    It's too early to cry wolf. We're better off sharing thoughts and opinions rather than trying to fix what isn't necessarily broken.

  5. #15

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    I wouldn't mind a "revised" Arbiter. If the original Arbiter was based mostly off of light templar powers, then why not create a new one that includes the powers of the void? It could even be given a new name with similar meaning (Intercessor?). But yeah, I would really like for the MS to be strictly singleplayer. The fact that it's limited to one regardless of supply drives me nuts. The should just give it a really high supply count and resource price.

  6. #16

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    I understand the fear and reason for the idea, but the latest video is a demonstration that blizzard is already aware of that and its current incarnation is the product of careful tweaking.

    It isn't a slow as a CC anymore (or slower), it can teleport place to place for relatively low energy and has a high hp/shield pool ; it is not going to easily get killed off unless the player is reckless with his mothership and deserves to get it killed.

    it has a set of powerful support spells. having this will change the tide in your favor in a multitude of situations. The amount of enemies you could possibly kill/ units you could save with them would far outweigh your costs.

  7. #17

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    This idea reeks of terran-ness.

    Whatever they do to change (i prefer "fix") the mothership, i hope it is drastic. Making it not unique is a good place to start IMO.

  8. #18

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    Does anyone here actually like the "unique" feature? I cant say ive ever seen a single person in favor of it.

  9. #19

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    If they do that, they open up so many options for themselves. I really hope they get their heads out of their asses and come around. As far as I can tell, making it unique does nothing for the game (though possibly lore). They are imposing an artificial restriction on themselves and us. As someone said, if they arent for massing, make their cost reflect that. If n00bs end up getting mothership-stomped, c'est la vie, right?

    In my opinion, 400/400 for a unit is already prohibitive to massing. Didnt they say they wanted every unit to find a niche? Even the big-guns? Well I just dont see that happening with a unique MS.

  10. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,102

    Default Re: [Idea] Make the Mothership a Building

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandonetho View Post
    Allowing a unit to heal/repair other units is revolutionary now?
    For the Protoss it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by n00bonicPlague View Post
    I wouldn't mind a "revised" Arbiter. If the original Arbiter was based mostly off of light templar powers, then why not create a new one that includes the powers of the void? It could even be given a new name with similar meaning (Intercessor?). But yeah, I would really like for the MS to be strictly singleplayer.
    +1.

    Name: Star Shadow
    Cost: 175/200
    Time: 60 seconds
    Produced at/Requires: Stargate/Fleet Beacon
    Hp/shields: 175/150
    AtA Damage: 2*10
    AtA Range: 5
    AtG Damage: same as AtA
    AtG Range: same a AtA
    Armour: 0
    Armour Type: Armoured
    Energy: 200
    Abilities: Shadowshift, Disable, Overcharge, Shadowsense

    Shadowshift
    Cost: 0 (but disables energy regeneration)
    Effect: The SS is cloaked.

    Disable
    Cost: 75
    Effect: Target (unit or building) is rendered inert and useless for 20 seconds (resource buildings included, but since it's the workers doing the gathering income isn't affected, unless you hit the Assimilator/Refinery/Extractor).

    Overcharge
    Cost: 25
    Effect: The SS can't attack for 2 seconds, but then does 2*30 damage rather than 2*10.

    Shadowsense
    Cost: 25 + 3/second
    Effect: The SS becomes a detector.
    Last edited by MattII; 01-20-2010 at 02:06 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Karune on Building placement
    By spychi in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 01-20-2010, 01:54 PM
  2. Dark shrine seems to be a very boring building
    By Wankey in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-11-2009, 09:11 PM
  3. Building Reveal in SC2
    By Nicol Bolas in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 08-28-2009, 08:36 PM
  4. Terran starships liftoff building Storage
    By LordArreat15 in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-28-2009, 07:23 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
  •