Will SC2 be a viable 3v3 or 4v4 game?

[dynamiK-]

I hope they find a quality way to include 3v3 and 4v4 into the maps. A couple shared bases maps couldn't hurt, just would be more variety.

[Asfastasican]

I hope they find a quality way to include 3v3 and 4v4 into the maps. A couple shared bases maps couldn't hurt, just would be more variety.

Well is it just me or do some of these maps like Lost Temple position allies far away from each other? I remember watching some of Crotas games and they usually end up being micro-oriented 2v1's.

[Nenol-phoenix]

It would be cool if players specialized in the units they built as Woland suggested, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been in dozens of 3v3s and 4v4s which lasted only the initial rush in which one or two players are destroyed and then is just mass units against the remaining ones. OR if that fails to happen then is just one or two players turtling and teching straight to carriers or battlecruisers. (Talking about SC and SC:BW) But I think we will see that again in SC2.
IMHO the team play games need to be more well... team played oriented, right now they're just some players vs another some players but there's not a lot of teamwork, sure it shows up from time to time but it should be implemented in some other ways... sadly ain't got the faintest idea as to how make that any more ideas?

[Krikkitone]

Well as long as the map is designed so players can reasonably defend their allies (Twilight fortress is an extreme version of this, but something like Lost temple begins to veer too far the other direction)

Then the unit specialization will begin to take over (each player focusing on a few dominant units, so they can save money on upgrades)
If the maps are arranged so 2 players are "Frontline" you could see people making their Mains into Planetary Fortresses (Engineering Bay befor Barracks)

There is also the Synergy...
Medivacs with zerg units...
I've heard rumors SCVs can repair protoss units?

Vikings with Colossi

Long Ranged units with Fungal Growth.

Observers/Changelings/Scan with Blink/Nydus

Siege Tanks with Forcefields

The map structure can lend itself to that as well... players in 'the back' can afford to tech a bit more.

So if the map structure allows it players will sort out... who has the Detectors, who's getting Sentry, who's getting Medivac, who's going Mass/Lings/lots/ who's getting AntiAir, who's getting AntiArmored, who will be going Harrass, etc.

Then you will get Harrasers moving around and coordinating their Harrass with attacks. You could have players specializing as Anti Harrassers.... the sensor Towers would become really useful.

[TWD]

The problem is obviously how to deal with rush tactics. The whole team can just rush one person, and by the time their ally comes to help the damage has been done.

I believe that Dawn of War II was effective at solving this issue. In their multiplayer mode you have to take over and hold various points within the map. Some give you victory points that help you win the game, and some points give you resources to build units with. The key point is that this forces teams to focus their efforts on more than one thing at a time. The whole team can't just rush one location because then the other team will take everything else. Now there are actual decisions to make. Do I hold this position or do I risk losing it to momentarily switch over and help my ally double team this other objective?

In early game StarCraft there simply aren't any such decisions. There is simply no downside to just rushing one player. There has to be productive things to do early game besides just rush or not rush.
________
Best Vaporizors

[sandwich_bird]

If they do maps like twilight fortress (aka everyone start in the same spot) it should be fine for rushes. You can all just team up to block the entrance.

[Maxa]

I've heard rumors SCVs can repair protoss units?

That would be news to me!