Quote
Every time you add in another hero you're risking unbalancing some factors. Using balanced units in general such as Zealot, DT, Hydralisk, Siege Tank, and Infested Kerrigan would be optimal, not sure about Firebats. In retrospect, I realize you couldn't use Goliaths or Templars either, without causing some huge imbalances. This is stuff that's easy to point out. But, someone will always question this, and ask, "why aren't the Marine or Zergling playable as heroes?" Well, you and I know they're unbalanced. But, someone just like you comes along and describes an article they wrote years ago explaining why Marines and Zerglings are cool, fun to play, and differ greatly in gameplay. So now we're going to redesign the map and potentially crap all over it for the sake of a popularity contest.
Because Goliaths are cooler than Siege Tanks. Well, yeah sure, but are they wise to use in a game with a limited ability to balance the unit? You couldn't use the Templar for the same reason. The Goliath knocks out all of the melee, and all of the ranged units counter the Templar. Go through the arduous task of trying to balance that and you end up with something like Temple Siege. Instead of just saying, "well it's not THAT important".
Because Goliaths are cooler than Siege Tanks. Well, yeah sure, but are they wise to use in a game with a limited ability to balance the unit? You couldn't use the Templar for the same reason. The Goliath knocks out all of the melee, and all of the ranged units counter the Templar. Go through the arduous task of trying to balance that and you end up with something like Temple Siege. Instead of just saying, "well it's not THAT important".
Strange.. I always find games with similar heroes or characters really boring..
I guess an analogy would be to compare Street Fighter 4 and Super Smash Bros Brawl ... I personally like SSBB over SF because the characters in SSBB are more diverged, allowing you to build upon a character that you like... SF is more discrete, tho each character does have their own play tactics, the differences are not as obvious as in SSBB.
Obviously, we can't change what the SC units are going to be like.. Zerglings, marines, tanks, ghosts, and vultures are who they are, and we can't change that (not until SCII). Instead of going against that, I'd rather take the units' differences to my advantage... Zerglings the fast guy.. i'll make him the fast striker w/ low HP... Marine's a fast attacker.. i'll make him Assault ... tank's attack is concussive, sux against small units... and vult's really really fast... OH! put them together as one hero... solving all the problems...
Instead of avoiding or working against it.. take advantage of what we have... To clarify.. using extensive triggering with Grids and Deathcounts to produce spell effects that's integral to the spell itself is arguably going against the system... This is b/c the triggers aren't always perfect.. and will just confuse players who aren't used to it. It is unintuitive.
Taking advantage of things is like.. for example... if I have pick a Vulture hero.. i'd expect it to be fast because that would be its advantage... Same as the zling hero... If I picked the Templar, I'd expect it to be slow, but its attack/strength/spells will compensate somehow, and I want to see what cool spells it has...
I don't think these units should be avoided, but things must be considered very carefully...
If we're gonna have preset spells... wouldn't this just be another Custom Hero Wars? and CHW is really imbalanced.. if you were the ghost, you can summon skeletons (ghost), and bam.... instant pwnage.
In Hero Sancturary, Norm's hero design also provides a good example of what can be done with SC's limitation.
None.