Support NeoGAF

[nkarafo]

I started playing SC2 this week, i finished the Terran campaign and i'm now near the end of HoS. But god, the campaign in this game is so annoying. Probably the most annoying RTS campaign i have ever played.

Almost every mission/level has some kind of time limit/pressure. This has many forms. Sometimes it's just a normal time limit with a counter. Other times it's a NPC who destroys the enemy for you and you have to protect him until he finishes (or else he dies and you lose the mission anyway). Or you have to bring some stuff in your base before the enemy does first. Or you have to protect something in the map and after you do, the mission is over. Or you have to destroy some towers to disable a laser that will kill Kerrigan after some short amount of time.

Almost every single mission is like this. There were a few i could play on my own pace but there were like 2 or 3 out of the 25+ missions in each campaign so far. In the Terran campaign there was only one level (the one before the last) where i could actually build a base and play/test with all the units that are available to the faction. Just one single level in the whole campaign. I suppose there should be one for the Zerg too but there is only 1 final mission left and i still haven't managed to play a level where i can mess with all available Zerg units and try different strategies without a time limit. All i do most of the time is build as many Mutalisks as possible and use them to defend/attack/complete objectives because they are fast, flying units that do a lot of damage if many. That's the only strategy i use so i can complete all the bonus missions before time runs out. All the other units are pretty much useless within those time limits and there is no reason to use them, unless a mission is forcing you to do so.

I'm a pretty casual SC player. I don't play multiplayer and i like defensive play. The reason i loved RTS games was because i could build my base, defend it, and when i was ready i would attack myself. Most missions on the original SC or other RTS i played (Red Alert franchise) would allow me to do that. I could build a nice base at my own pace while defending it by random attack waves, i could mess with all available units, testing each one out and i could explore the whole map if i wanted.

SCII just doesn't let me do that. And even on the few missions that does seem to let me do that, the enemy AI just doesn't give a damn. There was a late Zerg mission that after the time limited mission, it allowed me to destroy the enemy bases at my own pace. But during that time, the enemy was just sitting idle, not attacking my base or replenish it's killed units. I was able to destroy their bases with Kerrigan alone, because he wouldn't make more units after i was killing them with her own abilities.

There were a couple of missions i enjoyed, despite not being able to play at my own pace. But these gimmicky timed missions should not be the norm. Terrible, terrible design choices for a single player campaign IMO, especially an RTS that has soo many units to play with (there are many more than the original SC).

 

[MurkyZebra2417]

Well, Starcraft 2 is a pretty fast paced RTS.
Also, if you could build a base without some restraint/pressure in every mission it would become very boring very quickly.

I think they found pretty much the perfect balance and all three campaigns make it into the second best RTS-campaign of all time, only topped by Warcraft 3.

Also, Protoss campaign has some more "defend" missions where you can at least build many defenses, but don't take too long


edit: I also can't agree that Starcraft 1 was a "base building" RTS. If you want to build awesome bases play Rise of Nations, Age of Empires or even Empire Earth, they focus much more on that aspect.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

SCII campaign isn't really made for casual standard rts gameplay, every mission has various factors involved to throw in variety so you're not just building bases and fighting back and forth 30 times in a row. Personally I think it's one of the most fun and well designed campaigns ever in an RTS.

Maybe if that's not your jam just play solo matches vs AI? If you are just looking to improve in standard rts play then that will get you much farther than the campaign.

 

[n0razi]

Sounds like you should just do bot skirmishes or a custom map/scenario

The campaign would be pointless without the variety

 

[Tagyhag]

I'm a pretty casual SC player. I don't play multiplayer and i like defensive play.

You're playing the wrong RTS for that. You can't full on boom or turtle in SC2, aggressive plays must be used.

 

[Sinatar]

Yea I agree, I'm one of the few people that really didn't like Starcraft 2's campaign. Every single mission has some silly gimmick to it.

Sometimes you just want to dismantle a giant map sized enemy base piece by piece without having to worry about intercepting trains, or lava filling the map, or night time zombie attacks or whatever other nonsense they throw at you.

 

[capitalCORN]

Because if all you did was max 200/200 on every map, and steamroll the AI, it would get old quickly.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

Yea I agree, I'm one of the few people that really didn't like Starcraft 2's campaign. Every single mission has some silly gimmick to it.

Sometimes you just want to dismantle a giant map sized enemy base piece by piece without having to worry about intercepting trains, or lava filling the map, or night time zombie attacks or whatever other nonsense they throw at you.

You can do this in SC2 to your heart's content though, its just not part of the story campaigns

 

[super-famicom]

Watch this Giant Bomb TNT and feel the hype:http://www.giantbomb.com/videos/thursday-night-throwdown-021011-free/2300-3784/

 

[shandy706]

I absolutely loved the first two campaigns.

I'm a defensive player too. Love building up my bases. I didn't find it much trouble where you could.

I thought there was a good balance of interesting scenarios and base building.

 

[peakish]

Tbh each campaign should have had a couple more build and smash missions to let you relax (and replace the stupid defend base for 25 minutes missions). On the whole I'm way more happy with the amount of varied objectives of the campaigns, though.

 

[nkarafo]

Maybe if that's not your jam just play solo matches vs AI? If you are just looking to improve in standard rts play then that will get you much farther than the campaign.

I played a couple of games but all the AI does is build as many units as it can and go kamikaze on me. If i manage to destroy them i pretty much win immediately because i killed every single unit the AI has, since it wasted all of it's recourses and there are no defensive units left in the base.

I don't know if there is a way for the AI to play more defensively or use different tactics for a more balanced play overall.

 

[Deadstar]

Sounds like you should just do bot skirmishes or a custom map/scenario

The campaign would be pointless without the variety

I disagree here. There should have been at least a few maps where you just crush the enemy base and have to push through prebuilt defenses and structures. It would be much different than a normal skirmish.

 

[Sinatar]

You can do this in SC2 to your heart's content though, its just not part of the story campaigns

Except you can't.

A skirmish has you and the AI starting on even terms.

The campaign maps I'm talking about (which is what Blizzards older RTS games had tons of) have you severely outmatched at the beginning. The enemy base is sprawling, covering most of the map and is carefully laid out in such a way as to require unique tactics and unit compositions to overcome the defenses.

It's nothing like a skirmish. At all.

 

[nkarafo]

I disagree here. There should have been at least a few maps where you just crush the enemy base and have to push through prebuilt defenses and structures. It would be much different than a normal skirmish.

Except you can't.

A skirmish has you and the AI starting on even terms.

The campaign maps I'm talking about (which is what Blizzards older RTS games had tons of) have you severely outmatched at the beginning. The enemy base is sprawling, covering most of the map and is carefully laid out in such a way as to require unique tactics and unit compositions to overcome the defenses.

It's nothing like a skirmish. At all.

Pretty much this. People say they like the variety, yet i don't remember missions like this. With so many missions being time limited, where's the variety on that? The OG SC had enough missions like this and a few time limited ones as well. It was a much more balanced experience.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

Except you can't.

A skirmish has you and the AI starting on even terms.

The campaign maps I'm talking about (which is what Blizzards older RTS games had tons of) have you severely outmatched at the beginning. The enemy base is sprawling, covering most of the map and is carefully laid out in such a way as to require unique tactics and unit compositions to overcome the defenses.

It's nothing like a skirmish. At all.

Gotcha, OK I see what you guys mean now. The campaigns definitely should have had a few of these without the various limiting factors/stage gimmicks, they'd only be better for it.

 

[Deadstar]

Gotcha, OK I see what you guys mean now. The campaigns definitely should have had a few of these without the various limiting factors/stage gimmicks, they'd only be better for it.

The fun of RTS is building a bunch of stuff and watching other things blow up. There should have been a few fun missions that just let you do this without the stress of gimmicks or time limits.

 

[nkarafo]

The fun of RTS is building a bunch of stuff and watching other things blow up.

Yep. I mean, if i wanted competitive, stressful gameplay, i would just play multiplayer. Sure, time limited missions add variety but if it's the only thing you got, then there is no such thing as variety anyway.

 

[Tertullian]

Gotta disagree OP. I'm a casual SCII player who played the first two campaigns on Hard, and I thought they were the best RTS campaigns I ever played. They would've been boring with no time pressure. And there was plenty of time to build up a base, especially with all the upgrades you get later, like automated refineries and double harvesters and shit.

Plus the levels almost force you to use particular units. Like, it's incredibly obvious when they give you a new unit and make it optimal to use for that mission.

 

[Akronis]

Play Sup Com online with Forged Alliance Forever and enjoy a much better RTS

Spoiler

/s

In all honesty, I don't like Starcraft's approach to RTS.

 

[nkarafo]

Plus the levels almost force you to use particular units. Like, it's incredibly obvious when they give you a new unit and make it optimal to use for that mission.

That sounds bad too. It's like the game tries to make me play on it's own terms and pace forcing me do stuff it wants or play with it's own, premade strategies. I don't like that personally. In the OG SC i remember i had more freedom. And the campaign was still challenging, especially Brood War.

 

[Misha]

Except you can't.

A skirmish has you and the AI starting on even terms.

The campaign maps I'm talking about (which is what Blizzards older RTS games had tons of) have you severely outmatched at the beginning. The enemy base is sprawling, covering most of the map and is carefully laid out in such a way as to require unique tactics and unit compositions to overcome the defenses.

It's nothing like a skirmish. At all.

I couldn't quite pin down why I couldn't quite get into sc2 and this is pretty much it. I don't mind having missions that push the pace but I'd also like the ones where you methodically dismantle a big enemy base.

The fact that I tend to be pretty passive in strategy games (well really all games tbh) definitely plays into this

 

[nkarafo]

Here's another thing i forgot to mention.

In the OG SC, even during campaign, AI attacks were some times unpredictable. Even if you played defensively, sometimes the AI would try and find a weak spot in your defenses. Sometimes it even attacked your SCVs/Drones or supply depots/overlords. So you had to defend them too.

In all 50+ missions i played so far in SC2, in boht campaigns, i don't remember a single time where the enemy AI attacked my drones or SCVs or supply depots, unless it was an expanded base. But there was no time or reason to expand anyway. So i didn't even have to worry about these, ever. The AI would attack the same few areas again and again and even if i didn't have any defensive structures somewhere, the AI would still attack the same spots, even if i had all my army there.

It was very bad. Its as if the timed missions were used to hide the bad AI.

 

[Suzushiiro]

The problem is that if there's nothing pressuring you to constantly progress then the best way to clear the mission becomes "turtle in your base until you have a fully-upgraded 200/200 deathball that rolls over the whole map," which is not a particularly interesting strategy, at least not when it's how you do most of the game's missions. That's why to my recollection pretty much every mission that isn't a "baseless" or "survival" mission has some sort of incentive to finish quickly, even if it's just an achievement or bonus objective.

 

[Tertullian]

That sounds bad too. It's like the game tries to make me play on it's own terms and pace forcing me do stuff it wants or play with it's own, premade strategies. I don't like that personally. In the OG SC i remember i had more freedom. And the campaign was still challenging, especially Brood War.

If the game didn't provide strong incentives to use different units, I would've just ended up using marines/marauders/medics for every Terran mission and roaches/hydralisks/queens for every Zerg mission. I suppose I could've forced myself to branch out, but it would've felt like a chore, like I was forcing myself to do something that the game didn't really require and wasn't going to reward me for. Having real variety (not just slight variations) in mission structure is what kept the game from being monotonous.

If the game were the way you wanted it to be, I can't imagine I would have enjoyed it much or replayed the campaigns multiple times. Every mission would basically feel the same: build the same units (since the game didn't force me to try any others), build up a huge base with tons of defenses and a massive army (since there's no time pressure), and steamrolling the big tough enemy bases (which are pretty much identical to the ones in the last mission). Repeat that 25 times and it gets pretty old. That game would be a B- for me, at best.

 

[Draft]

The time limits are generous. There are many missions that require wiping out a numerically superior but strategically incompetent enemy. Most of the twists are pretty fun. I'm not going to say this complaint is complete hogwash but it may oversell the problem a tiny bit.

 

[peakish]

Pretty much this. People say they like the variety, yet i don't remember missions like this. With so many missions being time limited, where's the variety on that? The OG SC had enough missions like this and a few time limited ones as well. It was a much more balanced experience.

I made a count of HOTS levels:

6 missions without timers (some of these include harvesting stuff, though)
5 timed missions (some objective which has to be completed on schedule)
6 missions without a base
2 missions without a "strict" timer but having some racing element (eg. collecting eggs before Zagara, who can be killed)
1 mission where you strictly defend

I think maybe three of the regular missions have you destroying large bases. If they had, like, doubled that amount it would have been perfect for me. But there's definitely variety.

 

[nkarafo]

If the game didn't provide strong incentives to use different units, I would've just ended up using marines/marauders/medics for every Terran mission and roaches/hydralisks/queens for every Zerg mission. I suppose I could've forced myself to branch out, but it would've felt like a chore, like I was forcing myself to do something that the game didn't really require and wasn't going to reward me for. Having real variety (not just slight variations) in mission structure is what kept the game from being monotonous.

If the game were the way you wanted it to be, I can't imagine I would have enjoyed it much or replayed the campaigns multiple times. Every mission would basically feel the same: build the same units (since the game didn't force me to try any others), build up a huge base with tons of defenses and a massive army (since there's no time pressure), and steamrolling the big tough enemy bases (which are pretty much identical to the ones in the last mission). Repeat that 25 times and it gets pretty old. That game would be a B- for me, at best.

So the first Starcraft was a B- for you then?

Also, in the OG game i don't remember being easy to go 200/200 all the time. Sometimes the recourses in your main base weren't enough and you had to expand (which is something you never have to do in SCII campaign) and then defend your expansion too. The attacks in your bases were more effective and sometimes you had to replenish your damages. Or spend too much on more defense so there is no hole in it which made it more difficult to build a 200/200 army and go full attack. In the end, about half of your force was in defense anyway.

This is how i remember the first SC game being. This was how i played it and it was still challenging and interesting. At least for me.

I think maybe three of the regular missions have you destroying large bases. If they had, like, doubled that amount it would have been perfect for me. But there's definitely variety.

There is variety in the things you do sure, but in almost all cases there is pressure/some kind of time limit, even if there is no visible timer. You always have to worry about a gimmick that moves forward in some way, until it reaches it's end. Which is usually 20+ minutes or something.

The time limits are generous.

They are, most of the time, yes. To finish the missions. Or barely do the bonus ones. It's just not enough to actually let me play the game and enjoy all the units.

 

[Steel]

So the first Starcraft was a B- for you then?

Also, in the OG game i don't remember being easy to go 200/200 all the time. Sometimes the recourses in your main base weren't enough and you had to expand (which is something you never have to do in SCII campaign) and then defend your expansion too. The attacks in your bases were more effective and sometimes you had to replenish your damages. Or spend too much on more defense so there is no hole in it which made it more difficult to build a 200/200 army and go full attack. In the end, about half of your force was in defense anyway.
.

Huh? What difficulty are you playing on. You most definitely have to expand quick in SC 2's campaign on the harder difficulties. But, in either case, I rather liked the mission design in SC 2 personally. They gave a variety of objectives and actually pushed you to act, both defensively and offensively.

 

[nkarafo]

Huh? What difficulty are you playing on. You most definitely have to expand quick in SC 2's campaign on the harder difficulties. But, in either case, I rather liked the mission design in SC 2 personally. They gave a variety of objectives and actually pushed you to act, both defensively and offensively.

The one above normal. I think it has a hard and harder setup? I don't remember right now.

Not once in both campaigns i had to expand at all. Except one level where the mission itself was about expanding in order to get enough minerals (the one with the raising lava).

Also, when i say the timed missions are annoying, i don't mean hard. In this particular difficulty level i only had to replay one or two missions. And that's only because i wanted to do the bonus missions. It's pretty easy. It's just annoying and not not fun. Because all i do is what the game wants me to do. Every few seconds someone tells me to do something fast before something else happens. Do this before that! Go there now, before this happens. The laser is getting close, destroy this and that now, fast, hurry! UGH! Shut up already!

No time to experiment, mess with all the different units, explore the whole maps (although there is no reason to do so since the game is designed this way). No way to play the game at your own pace most of the time.

 

[Tertullian]

So the first Starcraft was a B- for you then?

Also, in the OG game i don't remember being easy to go 200/200 all the time. Sometimes the recourses in your main base weren't enough and you had to expand (which is something you never have to do in SCII campaign) and then defend your expansion too. The attacks in your bases were more effective and sometimes you had to replenish your damages. Or spend too much on more defense so there is no hole in it which made it more difficult to build a 200/200 army and go full attack. In the end, about half of your force was in defense anyway.

This is how i remember the first SC game being. This was how i played it and it was still challenging and interesting. At least for me.

If the original Starcraft came out today, opposite a more varied RTS like Starcraft II, and I were judging it solely based on its campaign (not the multiplayer scene), then I might give it a B-, yeah. Even then, the original Starcraft had more limitations on your strategy than you're admitting. There are levels where you can't effectively use flyers, or have to use flyers. There are levels where you have to use certain units. The game doesn't let you use the exact same strategy every mission, building the exact same units and engaging in the exact same base-turtling.

In SCII on Hard, I certainly found I had to expand for more resources on most missions. And usually I found that all my bases could be attacked throughout the mission, original base and expansions. I'm not sure how you got away with never expanding.

You may have a point about the AI, though. The AI in SCII never really attacks you "cleverly" (stealthed units, flyers attacking your workers from behind, etc). Maybe they should have.

 

[peakish]

No doubt SC1 and BW's campaigns were awesome. I remember the mission where you save a downed battlecruiser by pushing through a zerg hive, while two bunkers hold them at bay at the BC. Can't remember if that was timed in the sense that they would overwhelm it, but I remember how exciting it was. It also really felt like you were under more pressure from the opponent. Can't tell how much of it is my nostalgia speaking.

I remember not being as happy with how WC3 did these missions, though. Maybe because everything is so much goddamn slower to destroy in that game.

There is variety in the things you do sure, but in almost all cases there is pressure/some kind of time limit, even if there is no visible timer. You always have to worry about a gimmick that moves forward in some way, until it reaches it's end. Which is usually 20+ minutes or something.

Nah, I counted those separately (no-timed/special). In detail (sourced):

1. Umoja 3: Assault and defend stuff at your own leisure. Reinforcements arrive in 15 minutes but you have at least one base and two outposts to deal with before and nothing will fail you. The reinforcements are strong but supplemental (debatable, I suppose, but eh)
2. Khaldir 1: Destroy three Protoss bases. Periodic freezes of Protoss units occur. Wild animals assault your bases.
3. Char 3: Destroy a Terran base. Mission starts with a couple of minutes of you ravaging the early base defenses until the mission proper begins.
4. Zeres 1: Harvest meat with drones which have to be defended. Set your own pace. Pretty boring mission, though.
5. Skygeir 1: Assault a large Terran base with the help of infested terrans.
6. Final 3: Assault a large Terran base.

I'll say that some of these missions are the most fun in the game so yeah, I would have liked more of them. Three more would have made them ~half the campaign which seems reasonable.

 

[Arttemis]

Because if all you did was max 200/200 on every map, and steamroll the AI, it would get old quickly.

Speak for yourself.

 

[nkarafo]

In SCII on Hard, I certainly found I had to expand for more resources on most missions. And usually I found that all my bases could be attacked throughout the mission, original base and expansions. I'm not sure how you got away with never expanding.

Just build the structures that allow you to use the one single unit you need to do shit fast. Like a lot of zerglings. Or make 20 hydralisks with the regeneration upgrade. Win. With 3k minerals left in your pocket.

No need to spend resources making defensive buildings, mutation buildings, or other buildings that produce units you don't need.

 

[Syf]

Can't agree at all. The campaigns are excellently designed with very fun missions. Sorry they weren't what you wanted I guess, but most disagree.

 

[nkarafo]

[*] Skygeir 1: Assault a large Terran base with the help of infested terrans.

This one in particular, i liked very much. But i have the feeling that even if you don't get all the production units for infested terrans, they will still destroy the enemy eventually. That's because the AI does not replenish it's defenses at all. But yeah, i guess you can play that one at your own pace.

I had to play this on the hardest difficulty some time.

Most of the other missions you mention are early in the game so you don't have many build options anyway.

Three more would have made them ~half the campaign which seems reasonable.

There are 27 missions in HoS.

Edit: I suppose the evolution missions don't count. So you may be right.

 

[peakish]

This one in particular, i liked very much. But i have the feeling that even if you don't get all the production units for infested terrans, they will still destroy the enemy eventually. That's because the AI does not replenish it's defenses at all. But yeah, i guess you can play that one at your own pace.

I had to play this on the hardest difficulty some time.

Most of the other missions you mention are early in the game so you don't have many build options anyway.



There are 27 missions in HoS. So you would need many more to reach half.

I count 20 on the liquipedia page.

Yeah, the Skygeirr mission is one of the best. Probably because platforms is the coolest tileset in the SC universe. I liked Planetfall (the first assault on Khorhal) a lot, too. It's the best way to do timed missions. Overall the Zerg campaign is way too easy even on hard, though. I should probably try some of the better missions on Brutal.