Enjoy the classic broodwar game with improved mechanics, new units, upgrades, abilities, and lot of changes that will improve the gameplay and open new strategies and compositions to fight with.

Forum Thread
  Posts  
Terran Unit Tech Tree and new factory unit (Games : StarCraft : Mods : SC Revolution Mod : Forum : General Discussion : Terran Unit Tech Tree and new factory unit) Locked
Thread Options
Mar 30 2016 Anchor

Terran unit can be divided according to its type of requirements:
A - no additional req. Benefit from Reactor
B - need tech lab add-on.
C - need additional structure, but dont need tech-lab. Benefit from Reactor.
D - need tech-lab and additional structure

type C and D has upgrades developed in required structures, if otherwise this structures provide no other benefit.

Barrack

A - Marine
B - Firebat
C - Medic
D - Ghost

Factory

A - Vulture
B - Tank
C - Goliath

Starport

A - Wright
B - Dropship
C - Valkyrie
D - BattleCruiser

*to make above clear I skip Stormraven and Science Vessel

Point of this lecture is to show the gap in Factory scheme. The new unit (or re-adjustment of old one) could neatly take the "D" niche (ultimate late unit). For that it should be introduce also new structure with related upgrades.

Chassis of factory units consist of hovercraft, caterpillars and walker (DIamonback will be also hovercraft), peculiarly none of terran vehicle unit would be wheeled.

My vision:

Make a Siege Tank in mobile mode a tank, instead of artillery cannon in marching setup. Tank would require new advanced structure, where player can develop 2 upgrades to the tank (siege mode and mealstorm rounds). In mobile tank would have extra +4 armor, that he would lose if switched to the siege mode. Thanks to that mobile tanks could be used to hold against swarm of weak unit (be "tank" :)).

Diamondback could take type B, require tech lab only to produce.

Edited by: Łagi

Apr 1 2016 Anchor

I dont think that is mandatory that every production building have to get the same unit compositions.

About your idea, having tank fulfill two roles its interesting. The problem may be that it will make tanks harder to counter. If you manage to get closer with a bunch of zerglings/zealots the tanks just unsiege and kill the attackers. May be some are lost between the transition, but once turned to tanks will be nothing to do.


For a tanking unit i made the diamondback fill that role (will upload a video soon). Diamondbacks have a shield ability that reduces incoming damage (making them slower). And an upgrade that increases armor and make them take reduced damage from explosive weapons. Making them also good to counter enemy siege tanks

Apr 1 2016 Anchor

Its not mandatory. [blabla] Creating pattern that apply to many things is elegant - I perceive it as a good design and it increase my enjoyment. [/blabla]

Yes, tank would be harder to counter, but tank would occur in less quantity, because become late unit (cost+time.prod+sup increase) - think about ground BattleCruiser equivalent.

Can't await to test Diamondback.

Reply to thread
click to sign in and post

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.