I've always thought that having an ally controled by the AI with it's own base was something that was missing in the StarCraft original campaign (as it is the case in numberous missions in StarCraft 2, Warcraft 3 and other RTS...).
It's something I find both pleasant and comfortable being supported by a friend, even an AI friend, even an unskilled AI friend.
Unfortunately, in most of the map I've made in which I tried to do something like this, I had a lot of issues:
_Balance issues, either the AI does too much of the job, and make the map too easy, or the AI is so weak you barely even realize you're being helped (just like in most maps in StarCraft Reversed campaign, which I found very pleasant to play).
_Space, and collateral damage issue (tank, lurkers etc.), which sometimes makes you wish you were the one controlling the AI base.
I did once one map where I think I correctly implemented this, the ally was just sending cannon fodder in a random suicide mission way, and I guess it was pleasing to play...

On the other hand, I thought that secondary objectives was also something which was missing to the game, but in the RTS which have a lot of secondary objectives (again, WarCraft 3 & StarCraft 2) it's usually an objective that don't directly benefit the mission, but rather the upcoming ones (your hero won a new item, or you found research things etc.), which is nearly impossible to do in StarCraft custom campaign (unless you create a map tree for each optional objectives accomplished, which would require a loooot of work). I tried to do some maps which included secondary objectives which would help the player to finish the map, but again, balance issues which are very hard, practically speaking, to fix. Either the secondary objective is too useless, either it's almost unavoidable, either it allows to cheese the main objective. The best approach would be to give 2 options for victory, as in the Protoss mission 6 of Brood War, & Enslavers mission 2.

Well, I just wanted to share my thoughts, I guess most of you already have thought about this, and representative exemples of maps & campaigns that implemented these well.

For the secondary objectives, you could give players a code for completing them and implement a system in the next map to be able to enter that code. Not the most elegant solution, but it works.

For the AI helper, it seems like it would mostly require a lot of testing and tweaking to make sure the AI wasn't doing too much or too little. And unfortunately, not a whole lot to be done about the splash damage, other than maybe not have the AI produce those units.

I like to have AI allies. Maybe too much if almost half the playable maps in the campaign have them. Of course picking / writing scripts for them is tricky because balance.

Secondary objectives are a good thing, makes the maps not as linear, and gives the player something to look at apart from starting and victory triggers.

Thanks for the answers, btw, also, how do you guys manage to create maps where the best strategy for the player isn't just:
1. Defending & Expanding Early game.
2. Going mass air late game units (BC, carriers, guardians & devourers etc.)

Do you:
_Just remove the availability of the unit ?
_Make the ennemy produce hard counters ? (ghost for mecanical air units, goliaths, valkyries, mass hydralisks and all specialized anti-air stuff ?)
_Make the ressources available not so big, so you have to go for more efficient/ creative strategies than acting like you have infinite ressources ?
_Somethings else ?

I find this to be quite an issue for campaigns not to be so monotonous, so I also wanted to know what do you guys think about it.

Unit availability has to be removed for a reason, preferably not a random one like in the BW Protoss mission 4. But it's a good one. For example, in one map you're playing as stranded Terran refugees that don't have access to much tech, and their buildings don't even fly.

Hard counters are a good option. Terran enemies in my maps have ghosts, Zerg players have Scourges galore, Protoss use Stasis like it's going out of fashion.

I also tried limiting max supply in the abovementioned case and others. It's a good thing but again, has to be rooted in the story somehow.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 29 2024, 2:16 pm by IlyaSnopchenko.

I don't really produce campaigns, but from my perspective, limiting available resources on the maps would be one of the easiest methods and also would be easy to explain (planet has limited resources, planet has been mined out, etc). As Ilya said, the most important thing is to make sure everything has a logical reason which goes with the story and isn't simply implemented for the sake of gameplay. All of your ideas are good ones in the correct scenarios.