[DEBATE] Warcraft 3 - Legacy of the Void

[bhusta]

So, one can already watch the first tournaments of the latest Starcraft 2 add-on Lagacy of the Void on rockebeansTV which is called archon cup.
Basically a tournament with the archon mode.

Watching this, I was thinking about how could it be converted into Warcraft 3 Melee for all races.
I am NOT talking about the archon mode but the drastic changes that are coming with lagacy of the void itself.

Starcraft 2 implemention seems to be simple. more workers from the beginning, less resources to harvest overall.
This forces the player to expand earlier and more often.
The conclusion is that 9-10 minutes of early game are removed.

So how can someone do it in the warcraft 3 way?

How can there be more workers?
There can only be 5 workers in one mine.
Also undeads have two types as workers.

Also a big part of the early game is the that the heroes have to lvl up.
Should they have a higher level from the beginning?
Should all standard abilities unlocked?
Should the gain more exp overall?
Should there be a creep respawn like in dota and exp gain over lvl 5 for heroes?

I am not quite sure where to put this thread. Atm, I have no intension to make a game like that nor am I interested in ideas for new units or stuff like that.
If this thread does not fit in here a moderator can easily move it to the ideas seciont.

Keep in mind that this wouldn't be a revolution like a new game as warcraft 4 but an evolution like an expansion.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

Warcraft III doesn't suffer from the tedious build-up problem of SC2, as it provides something to do right from the start: creeping.

Basicly, the only thing you could do to shorten the build-up process in WC3 is by letting the players start the game with 3 more workers (or 1 more ghul for undead players).
This allows players faster gold income in the early game, as now you will always have 5 gold workers and can still start with the 3 first primary buildings or lumberjacking.
This should basicly already save 60 seconds of buildup time.

As an alternative, you can make all players start with a farm/burrow/zig/moonwell and an altair, so they can immediately start training a hero.

 

[Deleted member 238589]

Basicly, the only thing you could do to shorten the build-up process in WC3 is by letting the players start the game with 3 more workers (or 1 more ghul for undead players).

Some races would benefit more from that then others. Humans, for example, and their Militia.

 

[LordDz]

Let all players start with an altar, a food building and some increase in gold and lumber.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

Some races would benefit more from that then others. Humans, for example, and their Militia.

Not really; it just shortcuts the game with some gold and extra time you'd spend building workers. By the time you have your hero out, the amount of workers for militia should roughly be the same.

The only race handicapped by this would be undead, for obvious reasons; but that's why you give them an extra ghoul.


Preplaced buildings are a problem, though, as they could potentially mess up build layouts.

Another way to speed up early game would be to have altairs build (note: not revive!) heroes instantly. ... but I can already see all the orc players trashing anything with imba blademasters, screaming "get rekt, scrub!".

 

[bhusta]

Warcraft III doesn't suffer from the tedious build-up problem of SC2, as it provides something to do right from the start: creeping.

Partly true because one has to have a hero at first. But you are right, Warcraft 3 wouldn't need something like this as much as Starcraft 2 did.

Basicly, the only thing you could do to shorten the build-up process in WC3 is by letting the players start the game with 3 more workers (or 1 more ghul for undead players).
This allows players faster gold income in the early game, as now you will always have 5 gold workers and can still start with the 3 first primary buildings or lumberjacking.
This should basicly already save 60 seconds of buildup time.

I agree on this point but an undead player wouldn't benefit from this as much as other races because he or she only need 5 acolytes right from the start until an expansion comes up.
So either they get a worker which can harvest lumber and can build buildings or they get a timed gold bonus effect. Like for the first 60 seconds 15% faster gold income.

As an alternative, you can make all players start with a farm/burrow/zig/moonwell and an altair, so they can immediately start training a hero.

I thought about this as well. One point I see is that people want to place them by themselves. Maybe the first food building and the first altar shouldn't have a build time then.

Edit: Also there are only points about the early game. But what about expansions?
In Starcraft the resources have only half of the capacity left which they had before.
So, if one would do the same in Warcraft 3 trees and goldmines woulf only provide half of their resources what will force players to expand.
But is that really good? In SC2 are no creeps protecting the next resource field.
So, should goldmine creeps be weakened?

 

[Dr Super Good]

LotV is also adding in a lot of micro options. I think WC3 could do with this by adopting this approach.

Should all standard abilities unlocked?

That way your hero has instant access to 3 abilities to use in combat at all times. Your ultimate is also unlocked automatically at level 6. Instead of levelling up abilities, they automatically scale with hero level. This potentially means that end game heroes could end up being more powerful and that focusing on 1 hero to level 10 instead of 3 lower level heroes might be more rewarding. It also solves the problem with seldom used abilities such as Death Pact and its Lich similar skill.

Upkeep revision might be a good idea. Currently expansions are purely there to counter upkeep rate and allow you to keep building with a large army size. If you lose a lot of your army you almost instantly can rebuild it as your resource flow is so large then. When you are at max food you can stop all workers and save your resources so that you can quickly rebuild losses when upkeep is lower. This is sort of counter production to the flow of the game since basically you get an economic penalty for building units.

Removing upkeep to SC2 style would mean that players could build larger armies faster and over all encourage more fights (since if you are building up resources you are doing something wrong). Obviously income rates and unit costs would need to be adjusted, as well as overall availability of resources. Larger armies means more micro which increases the skill level involved. It also might encourage larger engagements.

Should there be a creep respawn like in dota and exp gain over lvl 5 for heroes?

Bad idea because it discourages engagements. People might spend all the time creeping until 3*lvl 10 only every fighting if they happen to run into each other and only then fight. Having creeps as a finite resource forces the players to eventually fight each other so could be considered a sort of progress in game state towards a conclusion. That said the experience for creeps could be re-designed so that they always give experience but overall less at low levels (so that it is always useful to kill them, but you will get similar exp fighting the enemy). Creeping should be an activity to do but must not dominate army on army battles. Since heroes have all skills, early levelling is less important.

Changes to the map so that near expansions are only lightly guarded with further ones more heavily would allow earlier expansion.

A good idea might be to reduce the build time of basic troop buildings and alters as well as of basic troops and the first hero. This way within 1 minute of start combat could be happening with nearby creeps.

Revive time of heroes could be changed, starting at almost instant at low levels and ending up taking over a minute at 10. This would also force the game towards conclusion since early on losing a hero (low level) is meaningless while towards the end (level 10) it will cost you the game as you cannot revive fast enough. This mechanic is used on AoS games like Heroes of the Storm. It is already in WC3 but I am suggesting that heroes below 6 have very fast revive times while above 6 they are very slow (a discontinuity of sorts).

Levels could be per player (shared between all heroes). This would mean that T2 and T3 heroes enter very strong so can see immediate heavy usage (instead of having to be creeped or left in the back). Adding heroes raises the number of experience needed per level meaning that purposely keeping only 1 hero until level 10 might allow you to get higher level heroes than someone who rushes 3 meaning that all advantage he has is lost (a possible strategy this opens up).

 

[bhusta]

Dr Super Good, you give some nice input!

LotV is also adding in a lot of micro options. I think WC3 could do with this by adopting this approach.

That way your hero has instant access to 3 abilities to use in combat at all times. Your ultimate is also unlocked automatically at level 6. Instead of levelling up abilities, they automatically scale with hero level. This potentially means that end game heroes could end up being more powerful and that focusing on 1 hero to level 10 instead of 3 lower level heroes might be more rewarding. It also solves the problem with seldom used abilities such as Death Pact and its Lich similar skill.

I like the auto levelling. I think, the way it is now, seems to give some kind of pseudo choice. Because on maxlevel you always have the same set of skills no matter how one decides during the levelling process.
This point is like the rationalization of the skillsystem development which blizzard did to World of Warcraft.

Upkeep revision might be a good idea. Currently expansions are purely there to counter upkeep rate and allow you to keep building with a large army size. If you lose a lot of your army you almost instantly can rebuild it as your resource flow is so large then. When you are at max food you can stop all workers and save your resources so that you can quickly rebuild losses when upkeep is lower. This is sort of counter production to the flow of the game since basically you get an economic penalty for building units.

Removing upkeep to SC2 style would mean that players could build larger armies faster and over all encourage more fights (since if you are building up resources you are doing something wrong). Obviously income rates and unit costs would need to be adjusted, as well as overall availability of resources. Larger armies means more micro which increases the skill level involved. It also might encourage larger engagements.

I don't think that Wc3 would benefit from larger armies. If one implements the auto levelling one already has more to micro. But I get your points with the upkeep removal and the adjustment of overall resources.

Bad idea because it discourages engagements. People might spend all the time creeping until 3*lvl 10 only every fighting if they happen to run into each other and only then fight.

Agreed

Changes to the map so that near expansions are only lightly guarded with further ones more heavily would allow earlier expansion.

I thought about this as well. I'll post a link at the end of this reply where I refer to another threat where someone claims that he will save Wc3.
@Dr Super Good, what are your opinions about non-guarded gold mines or blocked gold mines like one can find in Sc2 with destroyable destructables like rock chunks?

A good idea might be to reduce the build time of basic troop buildings and alters as well as of basic troops and the first hero. This way within 1 minute of start combat could be happening with nearby creeps.

I wouldn't reduce the cooldown in general of the buildings as you mentioned. I fear that the impact of destroying bases could be reduced due to the abuse of building sneaky buildings all over the map.
What about a build time buff of the beginning of the game?
Like in the first two minutes of the game "warpten" is active.

Levels could be per player (shared between all heroes). This would mean that T2 and T3 heroes enter very strong so can see immediate heavy usage (instead of having to be creeped or left in the back). Adding heroes raises the number of experience needed per level meaning that purposely keeping only 1 hero until level 10 might allow you to get higher level heroes than someone who rushes 3 meaning that all advantage he has is lost (a possible strategy this opens up).

I have mixed feelings about this point.
It depends in what direction you want the game to go.
Heroes of the storm always has the same amount of heroes. So, what you are suggesting is a mix of the original exp gain and the one which Heroes of the Storm uses.
How would you raise the amount of exp needed for a level up?
Would you double or tripple the whole pool?

I really like this idea in case of not having a weak level 1 hero in the late game,



Something different:
Do you know this thread?
http://www.wcreplays.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146973
I don't really support most of his weird ideas. Nonetheless, he has good points.
For example vetoes is something I don't like in general.
I would understand to veto a certain hero but vetoing units could break races.
But what I like is what is mentioned above in case of low protetected or even non-guarded gold mines.
In combination with a low amount of resources in general, this would make games a lot faster.

Another point he mentions is making a big creep camp in every map which drops a tome of experience.
I would like to do it a little bit different.
What about a boss unit like a dragon which spawns in the middle of every map and also drops a tome of experience but the dragon would respawn every 10 minutes.