Cruiser Command

First of all my thoughts:
As someone who has played on both the WC3 and SC2 versions of CC, I have come to the conclusion that in SC2 CRUISER Command has been turned into Fleet Command.

My Ideas:

1: AI/Bots can no longer use weps.

Reasoning: The AI/Bots are meant to be used to help with menial tasks and for convenience. The simple idea that a tool meant to supplement humans is being used to replace them. No player should ever be killed by AI/Bots (Except if some noob with 1 HP ship runs into AI miner).
In addition, the idea that A BC should be able to run into battle with just 1 Player on board and win is ludicrous.

2: Each team starts has just 6 ships slots

Reasoning: This is CRUISER not FLEET command. More emphasis is need on BC.

3: Each Ship takes time to build

Reasoning: It's illogical for ships to build instantaneously, although it might be possible to create and upgrade to allow for it.


Suggestion for Unused console on bottom floor:

A: Cruiser Based mining console. (Similar to WC3 version)
The Cruiser based mining would be MUCH MUCH faster than maxed Miner (with turbo mine). This would be at the cost of a lot of energy (a fair bit more than lasers) and It would need an upgrade to enable it. (Just like replicator)
In addition, since this would be OP, I would suggest that using it would disable either the weps or shield, and would like the miner be unable to move. The mining laser would NOT Have a turbo mode.
Upon using the console, the user would be given the same view as nav.

B: BOT/AI reform
Each team starts with no BOTS

AI's Can Only mine or science.
Multiple Bots types exists, each BOT type is task specific. However they would be much much cheaper compared with current bots.

A maximum of 5 bots allowed per team. 1 Ref bot, (which is by far cheapest). 2 Mining Bots. 2 Missile loading/Science bot.

1) understandable and i agree, but winning a 1v6 is pretty hilarious.....

2) Cruiser Command used to start with 3 miners, 1 wraith (then 1 corvette) the move to 3 miners 3 wraiths and 1 corvette is excellent for new players because we can move them to wraiths and not worry about loosing a wraith. Back then you WERE SCREWED if you lost any of your ships, also, i disagree with the "Cruiser not Fleet Command" statement, as...arent you also commanding your fighters from the BC? the Battle-cruiser itself is a powerhouse and deals with small ships easily, however small ships are basically half the game/charm and is important in strategy to maintain map control.
I will tell you now, having less ships doesn't work and the changes are good.

3) Screw logic and rules, i have money!
not to mention waiting is rather boring, good on paper as strategy and ideals, but just isnt "Fun" in-game.

A) No, it has been proposed in threads before, but the Battle-Cruiser Becomes the only thing important, and completely mitigates small ship roles, which are greatly expanded in starcraft 2 compared to warcraft 3

B) Thats how the game originally was made, but people hate refining and needing 3 human miners, when the 3 wraiths and 3 bots patch was introduced, the game became much more active early game....and generally more fun. 3 Bots is a good number, as most would like to have 4-5 in the begining anyways

(expanded on AI bots)/sorta C) late game requires many mining bots to maintain amount of missiles coming in and purchasing of ships, plus having many bots is a form of meta-game, having the price increase with each bot is reasonable. (it used to be 250Y/50G +50Y/10G, but was deemed to unreasonable and expensive)


Look, i can see why you want to make Starcraft 2 have the feel of Warcraft 3 (loader boxes would be preferred to missile AI) but with the new tools and assets of the sc2 editor, we can expand on the core mechanics and add more dynamic/smooth game-play.

Red-Rocket wrote:

Red-Rocket wrote: the feel of Warcraft 3 (loader boxes would be preferred to missile AI)

For the record, WC3 Had Both. And The boxes were an upgrade.

Don't you feel that having more ships than players at the beginning of the game is a bit ridiculous?

As for the 1v6 game. If your opponents were that bad, you would easily have enough time before the fight to load every missile and Yam. Nav to them fire all Missile then run to nav to fire Yam without losing shields.

But the whole point is, that other players should kill you not ai. And By having a player do, it allows for mistakes to come into the equation. In addition, there is no point denying the fact that the game IS centred around the BC. There should not be battle where only 1 person is on BC, I would preferably see as much as 3 people NEEDED on the BC in a Battle. Sure, let there be 3 ai miners and have another doing the ref and science.

And Since people hate mining, it makes getting that first drone so much more important. Thereby increasing the value of efficient miners, teamwork and the understanding that everyone has an obligation to the team.


In terms of the proliferation of Small Ships: While the wraiths literally won't even scratch a BC, The Dest and even a Vett' take too much emphasis of the BC.

And In terms of missile mechanics, I feel something should be done to promote their use. As something is clearly wrong when the weapons that are used is Lasers and Small Ships.
The Missle loading is flawed, how it is flawed and how it should be fixed I don't know.

Rohan wrote:1: AI/Bots can no longer use weps.

While I don't necessarily disagree with this, the main reason I think this was implemented was because weapons was comparatively a menial task compared to some of the more advanced stations and roles you could perform. I wouldn't particularly have anything against this change, just mean to say that I think it occurred because people preferred to do other things. Creating some sort of situation where having a player on weapons would probably be preferable to simply outright removing it, however -- AIs are supposed to be an 'inferior alternative' to a task that a human can do, typically.

Rohan wrote:2: Each team starts has just 6 ships slots

This I don't necessarily agree with. The Battlecruiser cannot be constantly active for a game like this, which means there needs to be a secondary intermediate in order to prompt for more regular activity in the game to keep things from getting stale due to a 'sit about.' Small ships are the perfect solution for this. I do not think 'more emphasis' is necessarily needed on the BC as it is already an exceedingly relevant unit as the damn thing that you have to kill in order to win. If you put more emphasis on the BC you'd most likely be shortening the length of the game due to incredibly early BC engagements that would occur. The small ships create a buffer that help prevent that.

Rohan wrote:3: Each Ship takes time to build

Just because it's illogical does not mean it's a good game design choice. There is something really irksome about buying a ship and being told 'okay, now wait 6 months for your lease to come through and then you can pilot it.'

Rohan wrote:Suggestion for Unused console on bottom floor:

A: Cruiser Based mining console. (Similar to WC3 version)
The Cruiser based mining would be MUCH MUCH faster than maxed Miner (with turbo mine). This would be at the cost of a lot of energy (a fair bit more than lasers) and It would need an upgrade to enable it. (Just like replicator)
In addition, since this would be OP, I would suggest that using it would disable either the weps or shield, and would like the miner be unable to move. The mining laser would NOT Have a turbo mode.
Upon using the console, the user would be given the same view as nav.

B: BOT/AI reform
Each team starts with no BOTS

AI's Can Only mine or science.
Multiple Bots types exists, each BOT type is task specific. However they would be much much cheaper compared with current bots.

A maximum of 5 bots allowed per team. 1 Ref bot, (which is by far cheapest). 2 Mining Bots. 2 Missile loading/Science bot.

For A, I honestly don't like how it essentially begins to make small ships irrelevant -- the direction you want to take it seems like you want the BC to do anything better than everything. I don't get why you want it implemented other than to take away from the small ships as you earlier suggested. It's a frustrating concept to me.

For B, I don't get the point either. What does this do for the game other than make AIs in general cheaper? One you set an AI to a task, you actually very rarely end up changing it except under a couple of circumstances -- and at that point, if you simply make them cheaper then there's honestly no need to replace them, you can simply purchase a new one outright and have it sit on whatever job you assigned it permanently. I don't see how it makes a positive change.

Ok, I want to clarify a few things that Whyte pointed out.

In my proposal, Bot's would be cheaper. Yet there would be none at the beginning. And They would be task specific (so by extension less valuable and versatile). Perhaps If a bot is shot down off the ship it is "destroyed" and must be replaced.

As for the build time:

I wasn't suggesting a long build time.
Like 30 Secs for wraith miner, 40 for Vett'. 60 Sec for Dest. It would proportional to cost.

As for the whole suggestion that I'm trying to reduce the importance of small ships:
That is simply not how I view it...
My objective with this "reform" is simply to have the need for a larger crew (basically more than 1, but the more the better) on the BC During the Final Fight , If it necessary to turn the bottom console in a (small) missile turret capable on only targeting Small Ships (Dest included) then so be it.

Rohan wrote:Ok, I want to clarify a few things that Whyte pointed out.

In my proposal, Bot's would be cheaper. Yet there would be none at the beginning. And They would be task specific (so by extension less valuable and versatile). Perhaps If a bot is shot down off the ship it is "destroyed" and must be replaced.

As for the build time:

I wasn't suggesting a long build time.
Like 30 Secs for wraith miner, 40 for Vett'. 60 Sec for Dest. It would proportional to cost.

As for the whole suggestion that I'm trying to reduce the importance of small ships:
That is simply not how I view it...
My objective with this "reform" is simply to have the need for a larger crew (basically more than 1, but the more the better) on the BC During the Final Fight , If it necessary to turn the bottom console in a (small) missile turret capable on only targeting Small Ships (Dest included) then so be it.

Then I do not think you're going the right way about it. To be honest, games were generally a lot less fun before we started getting more small ships out. I get why you're pushing for a larger crew, but I honestly do not think you're doing it in the right way.

Also, 30 seconds for a guy to sit around in the hanger twiddling his thumbs is an eternity. While I get there are other things you 'can' do, most of the time it won't preferable to actually do them. As much as possible, I'm for reducing the dead time in CC. This would only increase it.

Rohan wrote:1: AI/Bots can no longer use weps.

Eh. On one hand, I agree with the idea AI shouldn't kill. On the other hand, the AI is pretty bad at wasting laser fire, the only advantage it has is at being able to spam that right click. I'd rather weapons be made more interesting instead, and have people WANT to not use AI on weapons, cause right now weapons is mashing the right click till your mouse breaks, and that is no bueno.

Rohan wrote:2: Each team starts has just 6 ships slots

This would nerf the BC (powerdock), putting more emphasis on small ships. While I personally dislike the power dock, it would accomplish the opposite of what you want.

Rohan wrote:3: Each Ship takes time to build

This is a case of fun > realism.

Rohan wrote:A: Cruiser Based mining console. (Similar to WC3 version)

Meh. I don't see why this is more fun than having the BC launch and retrieve chompers, but I don't particularly care either way.

Rohan wrote:B: BOT/AI reform
Each team starts with no BOTS

I like this. Bots are a trap currently TBH. Put them all on mining, lose them all to one wraith, then blame your loss on "bad luck". Probably not relevant to your point though.

Rohan wrote:Multiple Bots types exists, each BOT type is task specific. However they would be much much cheaper compared with current bots.

A maximum of 5 bots allowed per team. 1 Ref bot, (which is by far cheapest). 2 Mining Bots. 2 Missile loading/Science bot.

This seems needlessly complicated, and I'm not seeing any point. AI don't get shuffled between roles usually anyway, but even if they did I don't see how it helps the game to prevent them.

The BC already has tons of stuff to keep people busy, even when there are AI's on science and weapons - not to mention a human is still always better than the AI's so there are situations where you want to pull the AI's off of those consoles

right now, during any given engagement, humans would be occupied with:

1. upgrades (yes, even during a fight)
2. nav (broadsides don't shoot themselves)
3. power
4. repairs (gotta keep those hallways clean, else you lose access to something critical and lose the game due to it)

now granted that those may not ALL be necessary at the same time, but usually alteast 2-3 are during any given engagement, and those compete with things such as having a person infiltrate/scout/snatch kerm/bombard with a dessy

seeing as how there are only 6 people (and quite frankly, 6v6 games are rare, 4v4 is much more common), having more stations that require humans would cripple most games that aren't 6v6's