The official Mothership discussion continues on the Battle.net thread and in the comments section of our post. We have compiled some valuable input from our commentators for each of the questions asked by Karune. The discussion will continue until the end of the month, so our readers are encouraged to continue sharing their thoughts and ideas.

1) Do you think the Protoss Mothership should be a unique unit (1 per player maximum) or should you be able to build more than one? Why?

Our reader and commentator, Ken, says:

If it will have the 3 abilities, TimeBomb, Pcracker and Black hole, then it has to be unique. If it only gets Time bomb and the cloak ability then it may be reproduced en masse. Because if it has the 3 abilities, it will become the main protoss capital ship, carriers will become its support.

Bunny is a little more decisive in his answer:

It is a great unit in a RPG/RTS or some flash strategy game, but not in a professionally played, super-balanced battlefield.

No unit should be restricted - because if it is, it means it is special, and there is no place for special units in a macro-oriented RTS battlefield.

Charles sums it up nicely:

I am both for this and against it. The unique unit ability is a nice concept to set the Protoss apart from the other races. However, it needs to be balanced carefully in order for it to be effective. Too powerful a unit and the game might be reduced to a tech-tree race (or in a Protoss vs Protoss scenario, a question of who gets to cast Black Whole first). Too weak and the one-unit limit is not justified.

 

Design-wise, it would be the simplest to make it a non-unique unit. Weaker than its unique form but ultimately easier to balance since playtesters can think of its effectiveness when more than one unit is sent to the battlefield and can think of counters to it (in the same way that the Thor is weak against mobile units). Balancing a unique is more difficult because playtesters have to ask how big of an impact the loss of that unit (or its presence) has in the game, much like Heroes in WC3 singlehandedly won or lost games (but are no means “required” to win the game).

2) What do you think about the Mothership’s abilities? (Time Bomb, Cloaking Field, Planet Cracker, Black Hole (currently out))

Bunny raises an important point:

Wonderful and original ideas … If they belong to spellcasters that can be shot down with ease, or act as support units. Not a flying armored monstrosity.

Charles breaks the abilities down and analyzes them:

Before we ascertain whether these abilities are balanced or not, we must first make a decision whether the Mothership is unique or not. Some abilities might be balanced if the unit is unique while others not.

 

Black Hole: This is perhaps the most controversial ability. The biggest problem I have with this in either scenario is that it mimics an already existing ability: psionic storm. Psionic storm damages units in a given area and Black Hole is a glorified ability that is limited to flying units (I presume). Instead of damaging units, it destroys them over a short period of time, which makes it a game-breaker. If we nerf it to make it deal damage, then it would be okay but that would displace psionic storm in terms of its niche. The other problem is that if it retains its “destroy all” ability, the game boils down to a question of who uses it first or who has enough energy to use it at the crucial time (in the case of a mothership vs mothership fight).

 

Time Bomb: Time Bomb for me is okay. Balancing this “invulnerability” is more tweakable, everything from increasing/decreasing the duration to letting some attacks through (perhaps concussive damage penetrates the shield, etc.) to increasing/decreasing the radius. If the Mothership is non-unique, the ability is more prone to abuse (attacking with a swarm of “invincible” units) and in certain ways might resemble the Steam Tank rush of Warcraft 3: Reign of Chaos.

 

Planet Cracker: While in many ways similar to a ground psionic storm, the mobility aspect (you have to travel there) makes it different enough for me. I think my biggest issue is that why is this ability coming in only now. It seems like the Planet Cracker ability is useful against units in the lower tech tree or ground units in general but the Mothership unit overall has little to compensate against the higher tech-tree units (such as a battleship), especially if the Mothership is going to be a unique unit. Overall it’s an relatively okay ability depending on what other abilities the unit acquires.

 

Cloak: The first thing I have to ask is how is the cloak implemented. Ground units only? Only when the Mothership is stationary? Or does it behave like the old Arbiter? It’s an ability that can be improved upon but if its use is merely to cloak units, then the Mothership seems it’s designed to tank more than anything else (something the Arbiter couldn’t do well).

3) Additional Feedback you would like to give:

Battlarmd says:

Protoss should have the Mothership.

It fits the protoss moto of ‘few and expensive units’, and seeing how terrans have a very well rounded army, the mothership will be how protoss can deal with them mid-game to late-game.

 

Cloaking might be too much. I think the cloaking of units should belong to another unit, another flier I suppose. but the mothership is a very cool NEW idea for SC2 for protoss, and it also expands on the philosophy of the protoss.

 

Would it be too strong?

 

I don’t think so. Everything can be balanced. Perhaps have the blackhole ability changed to something else, like.. a gravity field that suck fliers to it for a while but not destroy them. But seriously though, if the black hole spell takes a while to start up, then people who ‘cannot’ dodge it are those with poor micro, and they SHOULD lose the battle, the mothership might be too newbie friendly, if that is the case, but any Vet players will know how to surround the slow moving mothership and just EMP and yamato it twice. there’s one ONE of it, so I hardly see an issue.

Charles suggests a few other interesting abilities that might fit the Mothership:

Pylon Field: Perhaps it’s prone to abuse if it’s a non-unique unit but as a unique unit, perhaps the Mothership can have a Pylon field radius around it much in the same way a Phase Prism can act as a Pylon. Thus it also promotes the Protoss’s Warp In ability and giving a reason why the Mothership is indeed called a Mothership (a mobile HQ of sorts without deposing the Nexus).

 

“Energy Field”: The Mothership can easily have an “aura ability” that boosts the strength of nearby units. This can be up to you, whether it’s increased shield regeneration rate, a temporary armor boost, damage boost, attack speed boost, etc.

 

Reverse Warp: Since the Protoss have a “warp” theme (and why we have a Black Hole ability), maybe instead of destroying units in the Black Hole, we can transport them instead to another visible location, sort of the reverse of what the Arbiter used to do (can’t target allied/personal units).

 

Time Warp: Perhaps instead of slowing down bullets, the Mothership can instead move fast for a short period of time. (Best if it’s implemented as a unique unit.) Everything else moves in slow-motion and the Mothership suddenly becomes more maneuverable and can attack at a more rapid rate

Mercutio says:

The Mothership is an interesting concept that Blizzard ultimately might not be able to pull off given the severe constraints they’re working under for SC2.

 

My personal thoughts on the matter is that, given that we’re sans Arbiter these days, it would make sense to make this thing rather like a super-Arbiter. Give it the Cloak to bring a bigass fleet with itself, the Time Bomb to defend itself and said fleet, moderately powerful air and ground attacks, and a nice thick shield (if it’s unique, said Shield should be thick enough to absorb several Yamato blasts, a direct hit by a Nuke, or a fairly decently sized pack of Scourge, assuming we have Scourge still) and turn it loose.

 

The Black Hole in my opinion simply won’t make it into the game in the form we saw. Something that instantly destroys all aerial units within an AOE, given the fact that unless you are King of Micro your fleets have a tendency to bunch up, is simply too powerful and has the potential to end entire games with the click of one button when you annihilate five thousand minerals worth of Battlecruisers/Carriers and their escorts. Now, what MIGHT make sense in this area, if we propose to make it a super-Arbiter, is to make the Black Hole like the old Stasis Field; it locks everything down completely immobile for a time, but you can’t damage anything so effected. Sort of like an offensive Time Bomb.

An honorable mention goes out to aaron, who thinks the Mothership deserves a major overhaul. Check out his comprehensive comment.

Keep the comments coming - they are reported directly to Karune and Blizzard. This is an important period in the game’s development, where StarCraft fans can effectively improve the game they will end up playing.

16 Comments to “Official Mothership Discussion: What Our Readers Have To Say”

1. Mercutio — September 10, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
   

   I think it’s important to note that it looks like aaron was somewhat prescient; based on what Blizzard threw down on their website (and, in fact, based on many of our own comments here and the forum threads on battle.met) the Mothership DOES appear to be being retooled as more of an ‘ultimate support unit’ rather than ‘flying armored monstrosity of death.’ This completely makes sense, given the loss of the Arbiter, and I’d like to see Blizzard keep pushing in that direction. My own additional thoughts…

   The new Time Bomb is pretty neat. It is, basically, a souped-up version of the old Stasis Field/Disruptor Web. It’s very Protoss, keeping units or structures pinned down so they can be destroyed. Easily balanced by tinkering with things like radius, duration, and mana cost. This should 100% be kept in.

   I dunno about the new Planet Cracker; the beam looks awful narrow. That’s a little bit TOO much micro if you have to aim the thing that precisely. Unless its area of effect is larger than it looks. It should certainly be kept around, but it really needs more work and thought.

   I am DEEPLY unsure about the Cloak ability, and can’t render a judgment without knowing more about it. It LOOKS like you need to ‘deploy’ in some manner and become stationary in order for it to take effect. That’s absolutely not a good idea if the Mothership end up being unique, and still potentially a pretty crippling thing even if its NOT. If It’s going to have a cloaking field at all, it ought to be always-on.

2. Battlarmd — September 10, 2007 @ 6:52 pm
   

   The way the mothership is now on the Blizz official website.. is more like a mega Arbiter. Which I can live with, but if that is the case, a name-change might be requierd, as it is not really… A mothership anymore.

   I have an idea.
   That is to add some realism, and make the Carrier/Battle-cruiser, more expensive, take up more food (like double both food and cost) but make them Twice as tough. I always though how 10 marines can shoot down a battlecruiser is silly.

   This will make it MUCH less likely to see Cruiser swamps (as expensive as they become) and make the sight of a Battlecruiser and Carrier in a game MUCH more inspiring. Subbing this Mothership effect.

   For planet cracker. Currently, it looks rather weak, how about how having the Mothership shoot a thin psi-beam UP into the space, and then it bounces off some protoss satillite and comes down as a HUGE PSI-BEAM OF LIGHT, so it appears to come from the skies like the ‘Light of Babylon’? It will make for a much more interesting attack. And giving it more of an Independence-Day feel too.

   At this point though. I still wish the Mothership becomes a true mothership. If carriers and battlecruiser gets the interested cost and good, then the mothership should TOP that by at least double. (like 30 food, 2000 min) Give it a decent attack both air and land, and give it a global warning when the Protoss summons one, like:
   “A protoss mothership has decended from Orbit”

   It will sure freak some people out, and add a lot of ‘gasping’ moments for SC2.

3. Battlarmd — September 10, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
   

   a bit of a typos on the last paragraph, I beg my pardon:

   At this point though. I still wish the Mothership becomes a true mothership. And if carriers and battlecruiser get the increased cost and food, then the mothership should TOP that by at least double….

4. Asker — September 10, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
   

   Hmm .. does it still feel like what a mothership should be? .. or that unit needs a name change? ..

   I just would like to comment something about the Time Bomb Ability. Wouldnt it be better if the enemies in the timebomb to actually stop moving (as if time froze) rather than still be able to shoot (hmm .. can the enemy units move out of the affected area?) [maybe this can save up some processing and maybe clear up some visual clutter caused by this hehehe].

   Anyway, let’s just see what will happen in the next stages of development … ^_^ ..

5. aaron — September 10, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
   

   Battlar– One of the problems I see with making units really expensive is that you won’t be able to build them in a real game, where you’re constantly pumping out units and can’t wait to amass enough minerals and gas. I’m sure this was one of the reasons that the mothership got scaled down.

   The more I think about it, the more I feel as though the mothership was there to test the Starcraft faithfuls reaction to incorporating Warcraft elements. I mean, think about it: a unique, battle-changing unit with three cool-but-unrelated abilities. What does this sound like? A hero, perhaps?

   Just a thought: I feel as though we’re going to see one more protoss flyer. At the moment, unless the phoenix gets boosted, I feel as though protoss AA is a little weak.

   Also, I know this topic isn’t related, and this isn’t intended to flame or troll, but I hope Starcraft II has more female characters. Valkyries were the only female-voiced unit in SC1, but maybe one of the actually good units could be female-voiced. Protoss as well. I know the gender thing is a little more ambiguous with the protoss, but note how all their units are voice-acted by men? I’m not trying to start a debate on this issue, so please don’t comment on this topic unnecessarily, it was merely something I’d been thinking about recently.

6. Asker — September 11, 2007 @ 1:30 am
   

   @aaron - hmm .. how bout each unit ‘avatar’ being unique (can be male or female)? .. like a randomly generated face for each unit (but if multiple units are selected then guidelines should be made as to who will be seen in the display hehe) ? but there could be a problem with the unit voice because I don’t know the cpu processing requirements to generate a different voice for each unit … anyway .. just my two cents ..

7. Mercutio — September 11, 2007 @ 4:51 am
   

   @battlar - I agree with aaron that making units prohibitively expensive will simply mean they won’t get built at all in competitive multiplayer, but a key thing is that you psi isn’t directly linked to minerals/gas; you can easily cut down on things like the Carrier swamp (which I loathed on account of NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE ANYTHING and being just as likely to click on a tiny little fighter as the unit I wanted) by kicking the psi cost high enough to make a whole damn fleet of the things prohibitive.

   Oh, right, the Mothership!

   One of the problems with giving the Mothership a pseudo-orbital strike as you seem to be suggesting is that that sort of horns in on the Terrans nuke attack. I’d rather just see Planet Cracker’s AOE widened up so it can use it more effectively. Although I wouldn’t be entirely averse to them replacing it with a third ‘utility’ power like a passive aura; as I said, I wouldn’t mind if Blizzard kept pushing in that direction. The Protoss in SC1 were the race with cool powers and funky support units and clever tricksy tricks, so giving them the most badass support vessel in the whole game that can form the solid core of an offensive fleet without being terribly offensively potent on its own in the way a Battlecruiser or Carrier are would make SENSE.

   @aaron - I actually sort of disagree with you about the Phoenix. Build like twenty of those things, get a couple-three Carriers for backup, and huck them at an enemy fleet. Phoenixes overload all at once and completely annihilate all fighter-class craft and heavily damage bigger ships, Carriers finish the job. Hell, given that many Phoenixes probably a bunch would survive to come out of cooldown to keep fighting. Unless there’s a cap on just how many units they can damage simultaneously they seem DEVASTATINGLY powerful.

8. Starcraft 2 — September 11, 2007 @ 9:53 pm
   

   The Mothership would give Protoss an unfair advantage allowing them to have a heavy defensive advantage. They would beable to pick off groups of units and retreat back then repeat, whilst this allows them to expand therfore gathering twice the resources of the enemy. Then when it comes time to fight they would have 2:1 unit ratio compared to the enemy because of this hero like unit.

9. Starcraft 2 — September 11, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
   

   ps: now that it’s changed this will not be possible hopefully, with weakened attacks etc.. much needed change

10. AI — September 12, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
    

    To the Black Hole - if a Mothership operates with such high levels of energy, why not she creates a black hole only in a supernova-like-explosion way when she comes to her end of life? (or an autodestruction ability?)

    The explosion might damage the ground units as well as the black hole consumes the flighters (and ruins?) near the ex-mothership….

    just a veery expensive nuclear strike for protoss, used only if necessary, but soo impressive

11. great player — September 12, 2007 @ 9:52 pm
    

    I think that Blizzard take out the black hole was wise, since it is such a powerful weapon, it is not going to be balanced. However, the mothership should still have the ability to fire at air targets. Because if the mothership can’t shoot air targets, the air force of Protoss is way too weak.

12. WTF — September 25, 2007 @ 10:02 am
    

    no point in putting in the black hole ability if its not the capital ship. End of story MS = Arbiter

13. CandyShopGirl — October 9, 2007 @ 12:11 am
    

    Hi all!!

    What do you think about Tokio Hotel? >:)

14. Anonymous — October 9, 2007 @ 9:24 am
    

    instead of choosing that the mothership should be a unique unit or not, Blizzard could start off making it a non-unique unit and then you could choose to upgrade ONE of your motherships to an unique unit. The abilities of the upgraded mothership should not be as devastating as first decided then

15. Ken — October 9, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
    

    Quoting CandyShopGirl:

    “Hi all!!

    What do you think about Tokio Hotel? >:)”

    Do you mean Tokyo Hotel? I think its cozy, but not very affordable. Its a “not bad” place to stay though. I’ve been there a year ago so maybe its better now… Anyway, what does this have to do with the post? Do you play SC?

16. chrysrobyn — October 9, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
    

    Ken,
    Why feed the bot? Every Japanese person knows how to spell Tokyo. Have you ever met a Japanese person who uses an emoticon sideways? Likely a bot registering accounts and testing the ability to post and spam. Future posts will have URLs for SEO.

    Of course, if we accept the spelling as correct, it’s likely someone trying to drum up support for a German punk band which appears to have some success. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokio_Hotel