In the second part without Duran, I noticed something very different from what you'd see in SC2, the marines talk. And not just "go go go" like they're actually saying some dialogue, mostly silly yes, but a helluva lot more talkative than Duran. I think that's a really neat way, from minute zero in this mission, to make the marines seem more important, you don't want them to end up as poor Johnny. I mean they're also mean and murderous bastards, but damnit they still have a piece of the spotlight. I mean for comparison, take a look at Piercing the Shroud, WoL secret no-build mission. You are invading a top secret research facility, and get chased down by an invulnerable hybrid. What does Raynor have to say about this? A lot. What do Raynor's marines have to say? Not a damn thing. Generic units get a lot more talking time in SC1 than SC2 and I think it makes the units feel more valuable, even if their trash units like firebats
You're comparing a good example from one game with a bad example from another. Most missions in SC1 don't have the grunts talking nearly as much. And many in SC2 do have the grunts talking a fair bit.
@@RangerJackWalker care to give me a good example of SC2 grunt talk in no build missions? The only one I can think of is Zeratul’s stalker in the first WoL Protoss mission, and they don’t talk nearly as much as Zeratul himself
You've gotta give Duran this, for a guy who's been working on the same plans for thousands of years, he's pretty adaptable. There's no way he saw the UED coming, they came out of nowhere, but he was able to put together a plan to manipulate them pretty effectively.
To me, the big difference is the lack of a "heal everything" button. It means that missions are designed with attrition in mind, as you can't mend up all your dudes instantly.
14:10 this also seems like a good place to use that model of Marine with their headlights turned on. It wouldn't fix the issue, but I have yet to see that one effect utilized properly.
I think that the story took a massive downturn at the end of the previous mission. Stukov was betrayed by Duran and instead of informing Dugalle he just leaves for Braxis. Then Duran, the traitor who joined forces with them very recently, and Dugalle even said that Duran will always be a traitor in his eyes, tells the Admiral that Stukov is a traitor. Dugalle then says that he and Stukov have been FRIENDS for longer than Duran's been alive. I don't know exactly how old Duran supposedly is, but from the character panel I'd say that he looks in his mid to late twenties. Even if Duran were "20 years old," that would be over twenty years of friendship. There is clearly no trust if a guy you met a week ago is able to get you to order for the execution of your best friend without even an explanation from him. Dugalle and Stukov are both gigantic idiots. They're both high ranking officers who surely have a great amount of experience, but they can't even work a freaking phone. I don't believe for one second that they have no way of communicating because they literally have a conversation as Stukov is bleeding out. Stukov could have and should have retreated from Aiur to report directly to Dugalle. If the Admiral would have his second in command and friend of decades summarily executed because a guy he just met said that Stukov was turncoat, then surely he'd have listened to Stukov, but then again maybe not since HE HAD HIS BEST FRIEND EXECUTED BECAUSE DURAN, A KNOWN TRAITOR, SAID SO! This plot point is so rushed that it absolutely boggles my mind. They hardly worked for it. Duran was probably surprised at how easy it was to get Dugalle to have Stukov executed. Duran could have told the Admiral that Stukov clogged his toilet and Stukov would have been killed right there. Another thought occurred to me. Dugalle believes Stukov immediately after he's told how Duran is actually the traitor, so that's all the more reason to contact Dugalle! I really hate the end of the UED campaign. It's so stupid.
I think it would be better if Duran was using his psychic ability to influence Dugalle and Stukov , Stukov should have latent psychic abilities which would allow him to resist and make him distrust of Duran cause he would feel something is wrong when he is near Duran It would make some sense as during the beginning Stukov was willing to give Duran a chance while Dugalle wasn’t, and when Duran start influencing the two men start switching their option of Duran And it would make Dugalle believing Stukov immediately make sense as well as the influence is gone because Duran is not near him to do it Dugalle return to his senses and realize what he had done
I don’t mind it so much. Clearly Stukov needed to hurry or else risk the whole sector falling to the Zerg. And he (rightly) guesses that DuGalle would take a long while to be convinced. DuGalle is setup to be done in by his own pride, and it pays off well.
To pile on, everybody in all of these games just does whatever the previous person told them to do, which makes all the playable characters a bunch of morons. Even if the person playing is somewhat skeptical, there's a little TOO much betrayal in brood war. Kerrigan betrays the Protoss, then Stukov betrays Dugalle, then Duran betrays Dugalle, then Kerrigan betrays even more people....It's one of the reason I think people look back favorably on Brood War because it ends with the Zerg campaign, and it's FUN to be the evil guy after feeling like a dumbass for 2 campaigns. And for this UED campaign, why on earth is it even betrayal for Duran to execute Stukov? I mean that's basically what Dugalle told Duran and the team to do...that's why they traveled back to Braxis in the first place. I don't know why they don't just annihilate the Disruptor from orbit since it was always the plan to take it out. And then Duran kills Stukov (literally why they're there) and suddenly Dugalle is listening to Stukov saying "Duran is the traitor!" with no evidence after he'd already labeled Stukov a traitor with little to no evidence. I think the level design is superior to SC2 in these games when it comes to the mission objectives, but the story is like an 8 year old wrote it. Starcraft works better as, like, space soap opera, with Kerrigan being the flavor of the week villain that for some reason people keep working with her rather than high Tolkein-esque fantasy with "the universe is going to end" high stakes.
It's the same as the Protoss mission, had they just called Aldaris up and said "Hey dude, what are you doing?" then they could have avoiding murdering a whole bunch of Aiur Protoss and Aldaris's death. I think at the very least, DuGalle should have ordered the Adjutant to try and contact Stukov with no success (due to Duran blocking the attempts from both Stukov and DuGalle). Then maybe a throwaway line about how DuGalle can think 'clearly' again now that Duran is gone to imply Duran was psionically manipulating him. Also makes no sense to have wanted to destroy the Psi Disruptor in the first place. Sure would make capturing the Overmind a whole lot easier if you can just cripple the Zerg and waltz right up to your objective.
I think it feels rushed in places, like a mission is missing here and there. Protoss was already mentioned as another example. The story does it's best with the limited time it has, but overall it seems just too limited to tell the story it wants to.
Between Mass Recall and Co-op, I've watched these missions several times lately, and every no build mission has been a delight. This mission excels at storytelling from murdering civilians (which friends always let friends do) to showing you as the "bad guy" while you're under the command of Duran. Dark Origin is similarly expositional. The sheepyards and Battle of Braxis are both fantastic puzzle missions in their own way. The first zerg mission is speedy and does a great job of setting the pace of Kerrigan's start from nothing and doesn't stick around too long. SC2 does a lot of either "too many reinforcements" to replenish you to a set power level or focuses too much on the heroes. I can't think of a no build mission I go "wow yes, this one was fantastic". Starcraft's (not BW) no build missions feel a little less exciting and I'm not certain why, but it might just be the unrefined nature of SC's mission design (very few reinforcements, few voice lines).
14:11 I have seen Marines with flashlights on before, so toggling whatever that is for the parts with cinematic lighting might help visibility while still keeping the feel the mapmaker is going for.
I think I just kind of realized a significant plot hole. DuGalle claims that himself and Stukov were friends for decades, long before Duran was born, and Duran seems to be like, eh, thirties or so? So we're talking about a decades-long friendship here. That and Stukov came along on this potentially permanent one-way trip to retake the Korprulu sector with DuGalle in which they planned to depose Emperor Mengsk and his Dominion, and enslave the new Overmind to explicitly turn the Zerg Swarms into a weapon for the UED. And when they first discovered the Psi Disruptor, Stukov is the one that argues that it could be a fantastic weapon to use against the Zerg. There's absolutely nothing to even remotely indicate that Stukov could work against the UED's agenda or DuGalle's mission. Duran's argument that Mengsk could use the Disruptor against the UED falls flat because the intel stated clearly that Mengsk was never able to find it. I know Duran is very much not who he says he is, and his true nature runs FAR deeper than what we see here, but his argument for Stukov being a traitor is extremely weak. If knowing Alexei for decades and being friends with him could crumble this quickly, then how strong of a friendship could it have been? Seems pretty fragile to me, since all it took was a few sentences from Duran to make DuGalle decide to execute Stukov. I mean, hell, at the end of the game, we see how much DuGalle's decision weighs on him, so the friendship had to be very strong. I think this was simply a case of the writers making something happen that was really unlikely. And onto a slightly different topic, I am extremely impressed with Mass Recall. Been watching the entire series from the first Terran mission you played, and bruh... it's incredible. I would go so far as to say that Mass Recall is a better remaster than Starcraft: Remastered made by Blizzard themselves, because for me it embodies what a remaster should be; updating the UI, Cinematics, adding and improving things that were buggy/inconsistent due to technology and knowledge from the mid nineties, adding conveniences, etc like the improved spellcasting, better AI unit pathing, mass unit selecting, etc. Because let's be real... most remasters are nothing more than a graphical facelift, and that isn't worth the price of admission IMHO. But Mass Recall? I would happily pay $40 or so for this, because it goes above and beyond anything that Blizzard has done for Starcraft 1's remaster.
*All* of Mass Recall has had this issue of being really dark, sadly. Colours were more muted in SC 1 for sure, but it was also 2D so unit sprites still popped much more against the background. I'm actually a little bit floored they've remained this dreary the whole way through.
I personally think Heart of the Swarm has the weakest campaign largely because the focus on hero units detracts from the Zerg experience. I think you really hit the nail on the head as to why SC2 no-build missions fall so flat for me.
the viewing experience is just fine. The entire section of the mission, when you compete against self-destruct timer and the zerg are swarming aroung is horror-like, and this darkness is making that experience better. I remember playing the original brood war as a kid, on this mission i was shitting bricks and surely invented some new curses.
I really liked the zerglings and infested terrans just boiling up out of the darkness too. Normally I prize the viewing experience highly, but sometimes setting a mood comes first.
I would love to see you play through Halo Wars 1 to have a look at its hero mechanics, I believe there are only 2 or 3 no build missions though, but in my opinion the second no build mission in the game is the best no build mission in any RTS I've played.
Wasn’t that the one where you drive two grizzly tanks, I’ll be honest with you that mission wasn’t really that exciting cause driving two powerful units that can one shot nearly all infantry and those are the only thing they send at you, it just steam roll from A to B and back again
On Legendary they send regular packs of Hunters against them, so its not that easy task - you need to micro a lot more and save Canister shell for proper targets.
No build missions are my favorite in RTS genre. Especially when a mission begins with a no-build segment where you have to secure a base. Ground Control 2 did this a lot and I really dig the game for it. As for hero-heavy vs unit-heavy, my preference is just that it's micro heavy and not A-movable. Preferably some specialist units. Comandos franchise is an RTS that is literally made out of that kind of no-build missions.
I like the no-build missions like this one and the battlecruiser one, where you can do stuff that makes sense in-universe (hijacking goliaths, capturing buildings, etc) as a novel part of the missions.
I loved the sc1 and wc3 no build missions. In sc2 im devided, because in some cases the focus on the hero is nice, like when you take down the other pack leaders, but then it can actually trivialise the final mission, like in your speedrun.
Gotta love how Duran manipulates DuGalle and Stukov to fight against each other. The Terran campaign is about betrayal inside a betrayal, all for the sake of an 'unknown' third party. Pretty similar to the Protoss campaign actually, only there it's Kerrigan pulling the strings and we as the player actually knowing it. Here we don't yet know who Duran actually is and thus don't get access to the complete picture until much later.
SC1 missions are definitely good, but the thing with WC3 no build missions is that the hero isn't some one off thing you get this one time. The levels and more importantly THE ITEMS, you collect carry through, 100% those missions and looking around for secrets has a real reward there, and it feels great. That's how WC3 did the gradient of success. Yes there were less troop escorts than in SC2, but the heroes were *significantly* more competent and important than in SC2. I think StarCraft II saw what went right in WC3 but instead of copying over the hero mechanics, decided to copy over the lower escorts and focus on heroes. I think the most popular no-build missions in SC2: For Aiur, Conviction, and Enemy Within are the ones with big armies that you crash in with, less of a hero focus even when Kerrigan is on the field; the fact that everyone loves these speaks volumes for a larger unit escort style.
A good counter example from another series is They Are Billions, which introduced heroes and the equivalent to installation missions in their campaign added after launch. As you could expect from that, they weren't exactly balanced to interact with the rest of the game, the 'proper' colony-building part. The heroes didn't actually participate in those, they were only for their own special missions, where you only got the hero and maybe, on the less annoying missions, a few supporting rescued troopers. Your kill speed was so low, and TAB's name suggests its approach to zombie density, and so brutally slow kiting and punishments for error stack up to create some of the least satisfying combat loops conceivable. People suggested things like a persistent Homeworld-style squad of units that goes between each mission, giving you rewards for doing well and making everything matter, or a lot of other ideas, because in its current form it's just woeful. Really shows how even a good gameplay formula like the base TAB experience can be tilted into frustration.
This is probably my most remembered mission from brood war its so good makes you feel like an action hero movie hopping in the enemy mechs and using them to bolster your forces. And reactor meltdown stopping is just icing on the cake to Durans betrayal.
7:11 Not sure if this works in Mass Recall, but in Broodwar there was this funny trick to this mission, where you can have both your marines and the Goliaths. It worked like this: Cloak Duran and let your troops walk back a bit so that they don't draw aggro of the Goliaths. Use solo Duran to proceed to Stukov. Once that is done, you can take over the blue player, including all the Goliaths they have activated.
One thing I do like about the Starcraft 2 no-build missions are the boss fights. Big telegraphed attacks that threaten to squash a dozen soldiers at once are something I didn't know I needed in my RTS. But I think you need a reasonably big army to make the micro interesting, and missions with just the heroes and no backup don't really cut it.
The heroes being a straight up one-man-army gets really tiresome... They got to the point in SC2 where you questioned why anything was difficult for the factions to accomplish or why they even had other troops nearby, as in terms of their in-game power even someone like Rory Swann with Betty could likely hold off the entire invasion from the Heart of the Swarm intro cinematic entirely solo. I shouldn't have questions like "Why doesn't anyone else have access to Tychus' or Jim's 'nuke an entire hallway/room' grenades or rifle?" I shouldn't wonder why Artanis would sit in his mothership when he could probably solo In Utter Darkness entirely on foot. Then there's Kerrigan who doesn't even need anything said. Heroes are good when their power can help turn the tide, not when they are the entire ocean. It's a lot of fun cruising around with them and clapping cheeks, don't get me wrong, but they make the rest of the world around them an absolute joke and the setting and story suffer the second you start thinking about it.
Have you considered any of the command and conquer games? If I recall correctly i believe it was zero hour that had a really neat no build mission where you started with a hero and four excellent cloaked anti infantry. Your goal is to reach a target to destroy it, but along the way you can branch off and rescue prisoners and stranded soldiers. If you keep these alive, you can even have them commandeer some abandoned vehicles later. I also recall some in tiberium wars, one where gdi escorts a convoy but can choose to split some forces off to pursue a bonus objective, another where they assault a base and keeping engineers alive allows you to claim reinforcements. There's also a nod one where you have a small attack force that must secure some cargo and then hold out for extraction, with secondary targets scattered around the map to assist.
There's the iconic Tanya mission in RA2 that started you with just her spies and the mission was to disable 3 nukes guarded by the Soviets. That one always felt memorable to me.
I remember exactly the missions you're talking about - but with C&C you have to be careful, in RA1 and Tiberium Dawn the no-build missions were brutal and unforgiving. "Oh you lost 1 generic army unit, pity for you, start the mission again"
I personally don't actually think that focus on heroes is what makes a no-build mission bad or not. I think that the most important thing is that it is, like you said, a puzzle. And that you're required to use every single one of your units to the best of their abilities. In addition, truly great no build missions find ways to make optional objectives worth completing. The, in my opinion, best no-build missions Blizzard ever made was the Tomb of Sargeras and the Dalaran Prison, both from the Frozen Throne campaign of WC3. Because both of those missions contained a truly great mix of intense combats that relied on you knowing every single one of your unit's abilities. If you *just* used Maiev's abilities in the Tomb of Sargeras, and didn't micro your druids of the claw for heals and your dryads for poison, you were gonna have a bad time. And hell, even the puzzle aspects required more than *just* Maiev's blink. You need to use the huntress ability to see onto high-ground to get shadow orbs, which is just such a brilliant way to make an ability that would ordinarily be useless on a no-build mission useful. Dalaran prison was even better as far as fights go, using banishment to save injured units, priest dispels, sorcerer polymorphs, spellbreaker magic-stealing, it was the perfect army composition for *pure micro energy* Compare that to SC2 hero missions. Walk Jimmity Bimmity through a lab, and lob grenades for an instant win. Prison break with Karah Serrigan, and don't even bother keeping your troops alive because you get them all back for free anyways. The problem isn't hero units, it's when the hero unit eclipses your other units in terms of usefulness... And a lack of cool side content. Linear no-build missions are boring as fuck.
I haven't played a lot of rts, but of them has pretty interesting no-build missions. Its Armies of Exigo. Jayborino played it. Missions are not puzzles, but they are different in concepts. I remember some of them: 1. You can hire some kind of heroic units, with unique abilities and auras, that are not available anywhere else in campaign. And also there is sidequest that gives you specialized units, useful for final battle, and one more heroic unit. 2. Mission built around necromancers. You have to kill enemies and make skeletons. But because skeletons are temporarily, you always have to fight in order to not lose army. 3. You are given a pack of shapeshifters and some basic units of faction. And almost at the start there is mercenary camp. So that you can choose in which units to shapshift, or maybe to use shashifters as casters. 4. You are given small army, but you can attack enemies' posts on your way to free units. And in the end there is resurrection building, that allows you to resurrect some of fallen units for the cost of resources, that you collected on your way. And optional boss fight, for resources and cool consumables as a reward. 5. You are on a rush to clear labyrinth faster than another group) That's it) All this missions have heroes, but they are not that important. I know, that nobody will read comment on 1 year old video, just wanted to share)
I think the secret to a good no build mission is to build it around the focus of your RTS. Starcraft and Broodwar were build around commanding generic units with great precision and control. Their no build missions are tests of your fine control and understanding of the exact abilities of those units, essentially being a test of micro and unit understanding. Heroes exist, but weren't particularly special, instead they were just generic units with a power boost. Warcraft 3 is about powerful hero units supporting your more generic units, using them in tandem with each other, and the no build missions still maintain this focus, requiring you to use your heroic units to support and be supported by the generic units you were granted, it is also worth noting that the more generic units are designed with the expectation that they will need to fight heroic units as an inherent factor. You can see the focuses of both these games just by popping online and playing PvP. I will also point out, WC3 units are REALLY tanky even on the squishy end compared to SC/BW/SC2 units. Starcraft II is like its predecessor, its focused on the generic units. Yet the campaigns, especially during no build missions, keep trying to focus on something that the game as a whole isn't focused on, and that is the hero units. The game isn't built to support them, and so everything just goes a little bit wonky, and it produces a less satisfying experience. I think part of this is something that was said by one of Blizzard's writers YEARS ago during a BlizCon when they were asked about why they kept retconning things, breaking their own lore, and pulling stuff out of their rear ends. That the "new" mentality (read this as everything released after Wrath of the Lich King) at Blizzard when concerning story, plot, characters and all of that is not on consistent solid lore or story, nor even considering the future of their plots, but on the rule of cool. That writing as many cool moments as possible is more important than following the lore or having a consistent plot, that having their "iconic characters" doing cool things is, in their opinions, more fun than a "story that follows some arbitrary rules", and while I agree sometimes it is better to fudge the lore a bit and allow some rule of cool, doing so all the time cheapens it all and makes anyone who didn't breeze through a problem using the "cool" in your face option seem kind of silly. A constant focus on big gimmicks and cool heroic units going on a power trip with lots of abilities and wrecking the enemy as you attack move forward is an easy way to force "cool" moments, and a few of these would be fine, a favourite example of one of the coolest moments in all of SC2 for me is the first mission of LotV where you just attack move a big death ball around and reclaim the world from the zerg. I think another issue is that focus on those "iconic characters", I personally don't find having Kerrigan, and the missions featuring Kerrigan are the worse offenders, go on a rampage and murder everything fun. It isn't exciting, it is watching the writer's waifu show off how cool she is. The game isn't designed around her, nothing is designed around heroic units in general when it comes to SC2, so by their nature just adding them in means that they slaughter everything you put in front of them, they are one step below a literal "I win" button. It is like playing a TTRPG and watching the GM's chosen NPC do all the cool stuff, no one likes that. There's no mission in SC2 that heavily featured a heroic unit that I felt I earned my brutal difficulty completion on, there was no sense of power from them, because a feeling of power for me comes from the destruction of a great foe through my power, even if it meant playing dirty on my part and cheesing it, a foe needs to be a worthy opponent before there is any sense of power to be derived from it. Kerrigan, by her nature, robs me from the possibility of having a worthy opponent, and it isn't even like you can just not use her, in no build missions she is basically mandatory, and it other missions even if I didn't use her I still wouldn't feel powerful, because I know deep down I gave my opponent a handicap, I overcame nothing by not using my win button, I wasn't conquering a worthy foe by holding back, I was kicking a helpless child a bit more gently so that I could prolong its suffering. Even if I decided to just mass some stupidly OP cheesy army and use it, there is still more of a sense that I achieved the victory and over came by enemy, even if by BS means, than there is by having something like Kerrigan be there to act as an over powered murder machine, as the developers just handed her to me for no effort on my part, not even the smallest bit, and said "use this and win". Though, there are still missions featuring heroic units to a heavy degree I liked, one being Belly of the Beast, another was Piercing the Shroud. This is because the heroes in them weren't particularly powerful, and also they were just better designed for said heroes. The final no build of LotV also does this well, but still not well enough in my opinion. Nothing in HotS does this well though, because the Kerrigan power trip feeling is far too strong.
If you play with optional heroes you get Dugalle in the Alexander for the next mission which is actually quite fun. It's something I'd recommend if you want to do a proper slog towards the Overmind instead of trying to cheese it.
I really enjoyed the juxtaposition of discussing the lackluster no build missions in Starcraft 2 against the backdrop of this mission, which seems like one of the best no-build missions that Blizzard has made.
I think sometimes hero focused ones can be good from a story perspective (Kerrigan vs pack leaders) but a lot of the times its, "oh my troops died lmao i don't care because i have an overpowered hero unit that can solo the mission anyway".
While I could barely make out even health bars watching this on mobile, I have to admit that the lighting in the second half was really pleasant to play in.
What I like about SC1 heroes is that all of them are just augmented regular units who have more of a kick and are a little tougher and cant take on maybe 2-3 units before being overwhelmed. While in SC2 a heroic unit can take armies and bases solo.... In SC1 the only heroic unit who might do more damage than most on infantry level would be Zerg Kerrigan who actually has a unique character model and does not resemble any unit in the game
Agree. I think Grant sometimes mentions that heros are better done in SC2 because they have more abilities, but they ruin the balance of the campaing quite a bit. WC3 focusses more in smaller armies and items and there the heros work quite well (specially because the opponent have their own). I think Mass recall does a good Job here adding small abilities to the heros that arent game breaking, like Blink Zeratul or speed boost Artanis. What i would add as well is a retirement/respawning mechanic for build segments, but otherwise the heros are pretty well fitting in SC1/Mass Recall
About good RTS games with good no build missions. There's this Polish game called Polanie 2, or Knightshift if we are talking about a version released everywhere else. Besides having a main hero in a campaign, who levels up and gets access to better equipment, your normal troops also level up and get new armour, weapons, better dmg and higher health. So it's useful to keep alive some of your warriors and allow them to level up with you. Kinda like in Original War. There are quite a lot of these no build missions in that game, so in time it almost becomes a quasi squad based game.
The Command and Conquer games have some interesting takes on no-builds and some restricted-build missions (restricted as in you sorta have a base of operations and a way to make income but you can expand and your tech tree is heavily restricted). Tiberium sun has some good no-build missions; some good no-build prologues to missions (the GDI mission to rescue the mutant leader from the hospital that turns into a full on macro mission after 15 minutes of tense commando work comes to mind). G&G Generals has some fun no-builds, but mostly theyre restricted builds
To be fair to the binary 'hero dies you lose' mission structure in SC2, it was designed with a robust system of manual and auto saves in mind. A lot of the custom content you get into runs through the Arcade or whatever heathen multiplayer thing SC2 runs, that doesn't allow such saving. So some of those missions can feel a lot more punishing than was perhaps ever intended by the developers. The same way we can't really blame them if the rewind mod sometimes just messes up. Then I'd say it's on the mod makers to account for this new balance, my favorite adaptation to this is still in WoL: Protoss Co-Op Edition, where you got lives for heroes. Still means there's a consequence for failure, but only repeated failure rather than a gotcha autoloss. Your general point I totally agree with, though. I genuinely admire how Brood War refines the idea of no-build missions from the base game and makes them shine, whereas SC2 tried to do something that Starcraft was never intended for. Sometimes it's fun, but the game really is about masses of ordinary troops from each faction going at it rather than legendary shining heroes who do everything. Also, obligatory praise for the writing. Everything ties together and wraps up so well, it's as much of a treat to watch these missions knowing what's coming, because then you can see all the little things the developers put in to foreshadow.
I can't believe this mod decided to make the health bars hard to see in the dark. MR made a lot of questionable visual decisions. There's the darkness in these installation missions, and stuff like the landscaping in some of the levels where they made deep valleys that were hard to navigate through. Stuff that look sorta cool part negatively impact gameplay.
I like a lot of the Frozen Throne no-builds, and some of the Starcraft 2 no-builds that feel like more of a puzzle than an attrition simulator. I think those missions should reward your knowledge of the mission and the game overall and have multiple failsaves that still make you feel like you deserved to pull through. It's a tough one, because with that logic you are not really making an RTS level, but rather a puzzle level. Works to break up the pacing a little, which is fun.
One of my favorite no build missions is from company of heroes 2 (a ww2 rts) called "tiger hunting" you're given a small amount of units and have to navigate this small town looking for explosives and any abandoned anti tank guns to take down this tiger tank That's after you. Even after you kill the the tiger, you have to repair it, recrew it, and keep it alive to the end of the mission as enemy reinforcements arrive to reclaim it.
I think hero focused can work if it fits thematically. For example, the protoss make sense for hero focused missions. It fits the lore of small protoss forces being disproportionately powerful. At the same time for a group like the zerg it doesn't work as well, because the swarm is thematically about a bunch of interchangeable parts. Also IMHO, heros are better when the are support that make small squads better. Be it healing auras, buffs, or special abilities that would let otherwise vulnerable troops survive. When into non hero missions, level like the Battle of Braxis or Dylarian Shipyards are a great template. Using specific units to pick apart fixed defenses, is a rewarding puzzle.
I think In the Enemy's Shadow is one of the best no build missions in an RTS. Despite it giving you one unit, Nova can be so many different units, and is tough enough that mistakes can be fixed with quick reflexes. Makes it very fun to play.
I like hero focus, for sure. But along the Warcraft 3 model with a persistent customizable hero (HotS sort of did that). But also having a spectrum of success like you indicated with the BCs is a huge plus. Warcraft 3 did a good job with secret bosses and the like for item drops.
I remember having issue with several sc1 no-build missions as they have a hero, don't have a way to heal the hero, and feel dependent on you having the hero to tank. I like the Tosh mission in SC2, pushing with your ally I think I would go with either small army + reinforcements, or hero + ally
Im quite a fan of the infiltration style no build missions, like in covert ops (maybe with less cheese) something that can really help with designing these atmospheric lighting missions is having light aura's or flashlights on your units
Warcraft 3 has my favorite no build missions, but I think that has more to do with the relative power level of hero's vs army. I like the idea of having maybe a couple hero units who you take through, and as strong as they are, they do still need their army to accomplish the objective.
The second to last mission of Homeworld: Desserts of Kharak is good, you have the science officer Rachel s'jet and a small Escort of garbage units Rachel can barely fight and is support focused and she has a few armored assults, a baseruner, a couple of railguns, and some LAVs. You need to defend untill your carrier arrives, but enemy railguns quickly kill your armoured assults and the LAVs are useless, you need to micro really well, use the baseruner to put turrets in Good positions, and use Rachel's EMP optimaly.
Gradients of success is the phrase that had been missing. In SC1 Protoss campaign, proper use of Tassadar's abilities and patience can net you about 14 marines, 5 zealots, and like 3 dragoons. Yes, the mission has a lot of troll traps set by the developers which... are kind of bull TBH, but you can see that concept of "gradients of success" in that A LOT more. The UED Blockade in the SC:BW Protoss campaign has that in spades, and so does the Dylarian shipyards. Someone else mentioned that SC1 no build missions often were puzzles that focused around the proper usage of each of the regular units you got, thereby successfully blending strategy aspects of an RTS with the MUCH more puzzle focused level design. I agree with that 100%. I will say however that this really wasn't until Broodwars. SC1 vanilla had rather lackluster no build missions. Raynor's Command Center infiltration which... was just, A+move to the end, since you only had marines and firebats (and a marine Raynor). The Amerigo (Kerrigan's mission) in which the focus was again very linear, with just Hunter Killer everything and Kerrigan move to end beacon. And lastly the Protoss mission where you go inside an infested command center with Tassadar, in which the focus was once again the Hero, although it is felt a lot less because Tassadar's slow movement and attack speed makes him a lackluster combat unit and often insufficient to tackle the ambushes ahead. SC:BW on the other hand only really had the first Protoss mission which felt like the focus was the hero. The rest were handled spectacularly, even the no build segments, like the Psi Emitter SCV in the Kerrigan Campaign. StarCraft 2 feels like they looked at StarCraft 1 and Warcraft 3 for their no build misisons, but neglected Broodwars and focused on "Rule of Cool" as opposed to limited resource management and strategy.
There is another RTS game you might consider trying if you haven't, called Warzone 2100. It's a pretty even split, where about half of the missions are "no build missions" where you bring in a limited number of units (of your own choosing) and must complete the objective, with a bit of X-COMs experience mechanic where, if your troops live through enough missions they become far more powerful, but only if you can keep them alive through the campaign. If they die, they die. It's also one of the first RTS games (circa 2000) to use a full 3D game engine, something StarCraft didn't get for another ten years! I think I left something in discord with more details. I'd be interested to see what you think of the game.
Command and Conquer does no build missions real well. Because they have veterancy system so the games reward keeping units alive and allow for use of elite forces. Most no-build maps I remember (from RA2, RA3, CnC3 and Kane’s Wrath) are also terrained brilliantly
I pretty much agree with you, no build missions with a big chunk of army is better. This is mainly because a no build mission, to me, should be a question of "heres an army. Micro like maru. Have fun". Throwing in a bit of an extra puzzle and stuff can add to that, but the puzzles focus should be mainly just using the triops you've been given. Thats not to say heros can't add to the experience, they can, but you have to manage and design them pretty carefully. You can't have them be too strong, or have a particularly powerful healing effect so you can just hammer through any puzzles. But you can give them a selection of abilities which let you micro and puzzle solve with them better than a regular unit. That all Being said, the occasional "heres a hero, go bash through this level" mission can be quite fun, if the hero is intresting enough.
One of my favorite no build missions is the first mission of lotv, where you gat a giant death army and start going around killing things. Maybe that is just, because this kind of mission is unique in sc2, but I don't think so, I generall enjoy playing with large armies, where it is all about positioning more, than small ones, where I have to micro individual units.
I personally don't mind hero-centric no build missions, as long as they retain that puzzle aspect. For example, the WoL mission where you control Tosh and need to help the AI Jimbo build a base and push through the prison. There's a similar style of mission in the second mission of C&C Red Alert 3's allied campaign, where player 1 uses a commando unit and infiltrator units to achieve secondary objectives around the map and disabling the enemy naval forces while player 2 (controlled by an AI in single player) has control of a full base and essentially plays a regular macro mission.
I think an in between approach suits best, to avoid having missions become repetitive. Sometimes having a hero's life decide the result is a good target, while other times having a hero as a support unit is better.
I feel like the no build missions in starcraft 1 somehow have more story/worldbuilding than sc2 even though them protoss wont shut up about some prophecy. The characterisation of the marine or the depiction of the sheepyards make the world feel so much more alive than :" KERRIGAN, HOW COULD WE HAVE KNOWN?!"
Regarding no build missions, I agree, that StarCraft 1 has more fun no build missions than StarCraft 2 because the heroes are not as overpowered so, you do actually have to watch out for them and smartly use your other troops. Compare the mission where Kerrigan rescues Jim to the mission where Tassadar rescues Zeratul. In the former, there is barely any tension, you can pretty much solo the mission with Kerrigan and the other troops are just buffer. In the latter you actually feel tension, you have to smartly use your abilities and every unit counts.
I remembered that on this mission I would leave a guy near the SCV, not getting them mind you and when the zerg came he would say that he would like to tag along and I would still get an SCV but now a guy that was unkillable and I would just send him to the objective. I thought that I was way cool haha.
i really love these sc1/mass recall no-build missions (from what ive seen from you) Id even like more without heroes or the hero is allowed to die / "incapacitated" and then you just have to beat the rest of the mission without them - would add an extra optional challenge (instead of just restarting)
There's a mission in one of the Extras in Mass Recall where you gain the Night Vision button. Do the dark environment if you must, but give the player tools to counter it. Imagine having to switch it off to see the walls, but switch it on to detect enemy Zerg?
Its also good to compare the original No Build missions in Starcraft Original to the Broodwar Expansion no build missions. They are completely different in my opinion and I'd argue the Broodwar versions are MASSIVE improvements because: The missions are more story driven and the characters are more well liked. - Units discover things (Raynor discovers confeds have zerg in the lab, units interacting with other units). A lot of them give a feel of an actual RPG element style in an RTS without - Puzzle missions (similar to the Impossible Series of custom games). Using units smartly is usually always fun. The Starcraft 2 version is very linear of: "You know what you are doing and its pretty straight forward of I go here and I progress" The progress isn't even that impactful because the unit lines are pretty generic and the characters themselves may not even be that engaging. When Kerrigan become Primal Kerrigan, not only is she overpowered, it serves more as a "tutorial" mission of how to use her kit and to just show how she can kill stuff. It kinda sells the, "she is really strong" which we already know. In Starcraft 1 Terran Scenario 7 BW (this mission), you can see the marines interacting with others and requesting medics, bombing doors, and handing out orders. It gives the roll-playing sense and also makes it feel more realistic and enjoyable as a response. It is also why I dislike the Kerrigan Installation mission in Starcraft Original because it feels more of a generic "kill stuff and move forward." The closest thing to a no-build mission that is good would be the Secret Mission in Starcraft 2 and is the only one that is "good." since it has story elements to it.
I really liked the darkness in this game, when playing it myself. and I think that the player experience still matters more in mod making. also Mass Recal has enough other stuff to show off what it does, to make people interested in checking it out
I am with you with the hero mission in sc1/bw. but another thing I really liked about the "infiltration missions" or "indoor missions" in sc1 is that they actually feel like you are inside a building, like the corridors are narrow and you don't find any big or flying units there with the exception of ultras wich where in a big holding room. feels a lot more immersive than freeing toshes boys and having to gun down a mercenary battlecruiser and approximatly 30 freaking ravens with a canister gun in the process. I liked all the custom wall guns and other forms of detection and damage they put in.
This might be controversial, but I think no-build missions tend to shine in RTS games that have no hero units or their hero units are not that much different from regular units. For me some of the best no-build missions I had were in games like Command and Conquer Red Alert 2 and Emperor: Battle for Dune, though those missions were super rare and you got like 1 or 2 for the entire campaign. As an exception to this rule I would also say Warcraft 3, but that's only because the game was specifically designed around hero play, so every mission that makes the heroes shine feels exceptionally well.
You want good no build missions? You need to shift genres a little, but the TBS Advanced Wars series did it quite well. Like, it was a fairly common thing “predeployed” missions. And I like them, more careful strategy, less industrial “the one with the bigger infrastructure wins” attrition stuff”
honestly, a lot of the visceral appeal of an RTS, to me, is simply getting to command an army. no-build missions that give you a sizeable force and opportunities to expand it throughout the scenario capture the essence of the gameplay better than those that give you one or more hero characters to babysit with a few bodyguards. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds (the AOE reskin) has a bunch of solid no-builds where you’re just accumulating this ball of death
I agree on "gradient of success" comment, and it really extends to all missions, no-build or not. A lot of WC3/FT campaigns achieve this with hidden items that carry over to your next missions (I think that 'carrying-over' part is especially important). SC2 campaigns have this mechanic as well with zerg/protoss research, solarite etc., but it doesn't feel as much as a direct reward, perhaps because they're simply points that has no difference whether you get from mission A or mission B, and there is really no exploring around--you already know what points you'll get and how. A really cool mechanic would be to influence future missions themselves based on your performance, kinda like how you choose between nukes/battlecruisers on Korhal (Brood War UED campaign) but based on performance rather than choice. Also, not all SC2 no-build missions are too hero-focused and boring. Some certainly are, but in Nova mission on WoL, for example, you can't just go ham with Nova but is rather a puzzle mission. I think this is the best approach for SC2 case. Hero is important and unique, but your army is essential as well. At least it's better than SC1 approaching this problem by making heroes just glorified units, which I think is boring--there is no point having them around at all rather than just...more units. By the way, I really enjoy your content. Thank you for the videos!
The Problem about Hero Units in RTS lies in the battlefield they are on, if you want to have large scaled battles they need to be overpowered in some way - otherwise they get killed easily and you lose. On the other hand if you want to use them in no build missions they are either "the brute forcer" or "the fleeting burden" because most of the no build missions are still combat heavy instead of puzzles where you need to use your heroes abilities to commence. Novas covert Ops has some missions where you need to relie heavily on her abilities (as long as you are no speed runner of course :D), and that was a nudge in the right direction, could have been more focused on her abilities and the gear you unlocked. Currently I'm playing Spellforce 1, and there you always have your most overpowered asset - your Avatar - and some maps doesn't give you troops at all, you have to manage that one strong but still killable unit all on its own, and the maps are specifically designed for that - without a power fantasy in mind (which is why SC2 Heroes feel overpowered/overhyped) It is a RTS-RPG mix though and is designed to have that Hero always there. (even in Multiplayer - imagine SC2 tournaments when the hero units would be available for standard skirmish)
i really like the no build missions from They are billions because even tho you have a strong hero if you missmanage it will die pretty easily so most of the time you have to look for enviroment things to help you (like a explosive barrel , a way to activate a trap or something to help you ) it really encorages you to explore everything of the level (sorry for bad english)
I think no-build missions should reward the player for keeping units alive but also for looking around the map for maybe more units or an easier access to the objective. The command and conquer games did it really well in my opinion. Especially some "newer" ones like Tiberium Wars or even Generals.
Well, if I remember correctly, Cossacks 1 (I did not played other ones yet) had A LOT no build missions, and there are no heroes, and you are on clock because of food and usually ammunition shortage (look up how the in-game resources work) :D So you HAVE to be effective there.
I really like the belly of the beast mission in StarCraft 2 even if you basically only have heroes with the rescuable marines, medics and firebats. It is really fun hitting the boss with a decently sized army and 4 heroes making you feel successful for thinking on your feet to save them before they get over run. Although I have not played much starcraft 1 and no mass recall (I don't get how to download) so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
if I remember correctly, Empire earth has one campaign with a really neat no build mission. however I would have to go back and check and I do not have access to the game at the moment unfortunately.
You say you prefer the SC1 no build missions because they give you more troops. Whats your opinion on the Bonus mission in WoL? I feel like that one strikes a fair balance between hero unit and troops being important.
Yes Gerard, Alexei is definitely betraying you by activating the Psi Disrupter to disrupt the Zerg that you haven't even enslaved yet. And yes Alexei, "inform the Admiral I have a personal matter to take care of" is definitely better than texting him "Duran betrayed us". And then there's the Captain, who saw what happened an Aiur, including being overrun by the Zerg coming from Duran's abandoned position, just as Stukov predicted, but said nothing. As for the no-build missions, I don't consider the Dylarian Sheepyards to be representative of SC1's no-build missions. They're the odd one out, being much more explicitly a puzzle, and the only one which outright allows you to fail a segment. You're right that heroes make a difference when jumping to HotS and LotV, but which one is better comes down to preference. For some, it's more fun to have a broken hero. It removes the attrition aspect, but lets the mission pit you against huge hordes that could still burst you down.
Regardiing your question about games that also have no build missions. They are Billions has a campaign that has like 5 of them iirc. They are just really badly designed. Imagine a map filled with basic infected terran and I mean filled, like at least a thousand. And all you have is Jimmy from the first mission of wings of liberty. So all you can do is slowly kyte units around the map as you pool packs appart. Sometimes they give you a couple units from a bonus objective but that is it. And then in later misssions there are enemies that can affectively oneshot your guy the second you f up. My conclusion is that SC2 no build missions are still on the high end in regards to quality. At least they give you some units. Though there the heroes are also just so damn strong.
Looking back, I think a big part of why WC3 heroes felt better is because of the context. In a high fantasy setting, the 500 year old paladin standing as a bulwark against the slaves of an ancient dark power fits well. In a sci-fi adventure, having one guy with a gun cleaving his way through assault vehicles can create a pretty serious disconnect between that hero and the surrounding elements. You can still use heroes effectively, though. Having, say, Edmund Duke in his tank serving as the center point of a largely infantry-based force would let you have a hero be really powerful and important while still keeping a lot of focus on the other units. Even in LotV, the ability to to quick-drop Talandar onto critical points and then warp him back out works fairly well to have him feel really powerful without him just breaking apart the setting.
As a viewer, I love the cinematic style that they go for. I find blander mods that don't dare having more contrast and complex lightening to be a lot less appealing to watch and on thumbnails.
The cinematic lighting can be nice, but when i can't even see the healthbars of the goliaths it's clearly gone too far. It should definitely be toned back a bit.
I feel like a no-build mission should be more like an adventure than a classic mission. Exploration, puzzles and fun interactions should be the name of the game.
age of mythology has a couple of no build missions (more if you could the beginning of some missions), but they are usually strange and have 'special mechanics'. there was this one strange mission i dont really have strong feelings about where you turn regular units into much stronger myth units my taking them to one of 5 or so temples which you gradually unlock as you explore the map. there was a 'build mission' but since you have 6 heros and one of them can heal you can basically hard push your way to the end on normal if you take breaks to heal and split enemy unit groups in half
If you're after some good RTS games, origin is currently selling the entire Command and Conquer franchise for cheap, $20AU. My personal favourite is Tiberium Sun, has some great no build missions.
I'd highly recommend checking out some real-time tactics games. Because they stay away from RTS tropes like base building and resource management, basically every mission is a no-build mission. I don't have much experience with the genre, but I remember liking the Myth series when I was younger. (Though I was terrible and probably never finished any of them. lol)
If you want a game that is just entirely no-build missions check out Dawn of War 2. You get 6 squads each specializing in different things but can only bring 4 on a mission, each squad is unique and offers different utilities. The game also has some light rpg elements where each squad has a customizable level up system and you can swap out their equipment to further customize them.
I have a theory about this mission. If you pay attention, no one actually calls the player "Captain" during the first part, and the Captain was on Aiur with Stukov when Duran betrayed them, so I think for once, you're not actually playing as the Captain in the first part of the mission, and that the Captain is actually with Stukov's forces until they join back up with DuGalle.
Fun fact if you somehow make it to the end without killing any of stukov’s forces you can actually go back and recruit them after triggering the cutscene
In the second part without Duran, I noticed something very different from what you'd see in SC2, the marines talk. And not just "go go go" like they're actually saying some dialogue, mostly silly yes, but a helluva lot more talkative than Duran. I think that's a really neat way, from minute zero in this mission, to make the marines seem more important, you don't want them to end up as poor Johnny. I mean they're also mean and murderous bastards, but damnit they still have a piece of the spotlight. I mean for comparison, take a look at Piercing the Shroud, WoL secret no-build mission. You are invading a top secret research facility, and get chased down by an invulnerable hybrid. What does Raynor have to say about this? A lot. What do Raynor's marines have to say? Not a damn thing. Generic units get a lot more talking time in SC1 than SC2 and I think it makes the units feel more valuable, even if their trash units like firebats
I really like this. Great insight!
Also I believe that the marines you rescue with Tassadar on SC Protoss 6 have some dialogue as well... provided that the player doesn't storm them!
You're comparing a good example from one game with a bad example from another. Most missions in SC1 don't have the grunts talking nearly as much. And many in SC2 do have the grunts talking a fair bit.
@@amplesstratleholm7609 Thanks Lowko.
@@RangerJackWalker care to give me a good example of SC2 grunt talk in no build missions? The only one I can think of is Zeratul’s stalker in the first WoL Protoss mission, and they don’t talk nearly as much as Zeratul himself
DuGalle: "...Long before you were born!"
Darud:"Right, right."
...Sandstorm!
@@glebgro psistorm*
i was thinking the same thing, when i heard those lines.
You've gotta give Duran this, for a guy who's been working on the same plans for thousands of years, he's pretty adaptable. There's no way he saw the UED coming, they came out of nowhere, but he was able to put together a plan to manipulate them pretty effectively.
Something that took me a while to notice is that Duran's voice shifts when he says "Perhaps Stukov's loyalties" and "Stukov has betrayed you!"
His infested voice is really cool. Especially when you go into Zerg's campaign, this is just icing on the cake.
"To terminate your command" Is another. Love the subtle hints if the player listens carefully.
To me, the big difference is the lack of a "heal everything" button. It means that missions are designed with attrition in mind, as you can't mend up all your dudes instantly.
14:10 this also seems like a good place to use that model of Marine with their headlights turned on. It wouldn't fix the issue, but I have yet to see that one effect utilized properly.
Another Episode #4 well done, Grant.
Agreed. This is by far the best episode 9 I've seen yet
I think that the story took a massive downturn at the end of the previous mission.
Stukov was betrayed by Duran and instead of informing Dugalle he just leaves for Braxis.
Then Duran, the traitor who joined forces with them very recently, and Dugalle even said that Duran will always be a traitor in his eyes, tells the Admiral that Stukov is a traitor. Dugalle then says that he and Stukov have been FRIENDS for longer than Duran's been alive. I don't know exactly how old Duran supposedly is, but from the character panel I'd say that he looks in his mid to late twenties. Even if Duran were "20 years old," that would be over twenty years of friendship.
There is clearly no trust if a guy you met a week ago is able to get you to order for the execution of your best friend without even an explanation from him.
Dugalle and Stukov are both gigantic idiots. They're both high ranking officers who surely have a great amount of experience, but they can't even work a freaking phone. I don't believe for one second that they have no way of communicating because they literally have a conversation as Stukov is bleeding out. Stukov could have and should have retreated from Aiur to report directly to Dugalle. If the Admiral would have his second in command and friend of decades summarily executed because a guy he just met said that Stukov was turncoat, then surely he'd have listened to Stukov, but then again maybe not since HE HAD HIS BEST FRIEND EXECUTED BECAUSE DURAN, A KNOWN TRAITOR, SAID SO!
This plot point is so rushed that it absolutely boggles my mind. They hardly worked for it. Duran was probably surprised at how easy it was to get Dugalle to have Stukov executed. Duran could have told the Admiral that Stukov clogged his toilet and Stukov would have been killed right there.
Another thought occurred to me. Dugalle believes Stukov immediately after he's told how Duran is actually the traitor, so that's all the more reason to contact Dugalle!
I really hate the end of the UED campaign. It's so stupid.
I think it would be better if Duran was using his psychic ability to influence Dugalle and Stukov , Stukov should have latent psychic abilities which would allow him to resist and make him distrust of Duran cause he would feel something is wrong when he is near Duran
It would make some sense as during the beginning Stukov was willing to give Duran a chance while Dugalle wasn’t, and when Duran start influencing the two men start switching their option of Duran
And it would make Dugalle believing Stukov immediately make sense as well as the influence is gone because Duran is not near him to do it Dugalle return to his senses and realize what he had done
I don’t mind it so much. Clearly Stukov needed to hurry or else risk the whole sector falling to the Zerg. And he (rightly) guesses that DuGalle would take a long while to be convinced.
DuGalle is setup to be done in by his own pride, and it pays off well.
To pile on, everybody in all of these games just does whatever the previous person told them to do, which makes all the playable characters a bunch of morons. Even if the person playing is somewhat skeptical, there's a little TOO much betrayal in brood war. Kerrigan betrays the Protoss, then Stukov betrays Dugalle, then Duran betrays Dugalle, then Kerrigan betrays even more people....It's one of the reason I think people look back favorably on Brood War because it ends with the Zerg campaign, and it's FUN to be the evil guy after feeling like a dumbass for 2 campaigns.
And for this UED campaign, why on earth is it even betrayal for Duran to execute Stukov? I mean that's basically what Dugalle told Duran and the team to do...that's why they traveled back to Braxis in the first place. I don't know why they don't just annihilate the Disruptor from orbit since it was always the plan to take it out. And then Duran kills Stukov (literally why they're there) and suddenly Dugalle is listening to Stukov saying "Duran is the traitor!" with no evidence after he'd already labeled Stukov a traitor with little to no evidence. I think the level design is superior to SC2 in these games when it comes to the mission objectives, but the story is like an 8 year old wrote it. Starcraft works better as, like, space soap opera, with Kerrigan being the flavor of the week villain that for some reason people keep working with her rather than high Tolkein-esque fantasy with "the universe is going to end" high stakes.
It's the same as the Protoss mission, had they just called Aldaris up and said "Hey dude, what are you doing?" then they could have avoiding murdering a whole bunch of Aiur Protoss and Aldaris's death.
I think at the very least, DuGalle should have ordered the Adjutant to try and contact Stukov with no success (due to Duran blocking the attempts from both Stukov and DuGalle). Then maybe a throwaway line about how DuGalle can think 'clearly' again now that Duran is gone to imply Duran was psionically manipulating him.
Also makes no sense to have wanted to destroy the Psi Disruptor in the first place. Sure would make capturing the Overmind a whole lot easier if you can just cripple the Zerg and waltz right up to your objective.
I think it feels rushed in places, like a mission is missing here and there. Protoss was already mentioned as another example. The story does it's best with the limited time it has, but overall it seems just too limited to tell the story it wants to.
Between Mass Recall and Co-op, I've watched these missions several times lately, and every no build mission has been a delight.
This mission excels at storytelling from murdering civilians (which friends always let friends do) to showing you as the "bad guy" while you're under the command of Duran. Dark Origin is similarly expositional.
The sheepyards and Battle of Braxis are both fantastic puzzle missions in their own way.
The first zerg mission is speedy and does a great job of setting the pace of Kerrigan's start from nothing and doesn't stick around too long.
SC2 does a lot of either "too many reinforcements" to replenish you to a set power level or focuses too much on the heroes. I can't think of a no build mission I go "wow yes, this one was fantastic".
Starcraft's (not BW) no build missions feel a little less exciting and I'm not certain why, but it might just be the unrefined nature of SC's mission design (very few reinforcements, few voice lines).
The one SC2 no build segment I remember fondly was the one where you can take over mechanical units with Karax.
14:11 I have seen Marines with flashlights on before, so toggling whatever that is for the parts with cinematic lighting might help visibility while still keeping the feel the mapmaker is going for.
I think I just kind of realized a significant plot hole. DuGalle claims that himself and Stukov were friends for decades, long before Duran was born, and Duran seems to be like, eh, thirties or so? So we're talking about a decades-long friendship here. That and Stukov came along on this potentially permanent one-way trip to retake the Korprulu sector with DuGalle in which they planned to depose Emperor Mengsk and his Dominion, and enslave the new Overmind to explicitly turn the Zerg Swarms into a weapon for the UED. And when they first discovered the Psi Disruptor, Stukov is the one that argues that it could be a fantastic weapon to use against the Zerg. There's absolutely nothing to even remotely indicate that Stukov could work against the UED's agenda or DuGalle's mission. Duran's argument that Mengsk could use the Disruptor against the UED falls flat because the intel stated clearly that Mengsk was never able to find it.
I know Duran is very much not who he says he is, and his true nature runs FAR deeper than what we see here, but his argument for Stukov being a traitor is extremely weak. If knowing Alexei for decades and being friends with him could crumble this quickly, then how strong of a friendship could it have been? Seems pretty fragile to me, since all it took was a few sentences from Duran to make DuGalle decide to execute Stukov. I mean, hell, at the end of the game, we see how much DuGalle's decision weighs on him, so the friendship had to be very strong. I think this was simply a case of the writers making something happen that was really unlikely.
And onto a slightly different topic, I am extremely impressed with Mass Recall. Been watching the entire series from the first Terran mission you played, and bruh... it's incredible. I would go so far as to say that Mass Recall is a better remaster than Starcraft: Remastered made by Blizzard themselves, because for me it embodies what a remaster should be; updating the UI, Cinematics, adding and improving things that were buggy/inconsistent due to technology and knowledge from the mid nineties, adding conveniences, etc like the improved spellcasting, better AI unit pathing, mass unit selecting, etc. Because let's be real... most remasters are nothing more than a graphical facelift, and that isn't worth the price of admission IMHO. But Mass Recall? I would happily pay $40 or so for this, because it goes above and beyond anything that Blizzard has done for Starcraft 1's remaster.
*All* of Mass Recall has had this issue of being really dark, sadly. Colours were more muted in SC 1 for sure, but it was also 2D so unit sprites still popped much more against the background. I'm actually a little bit floored they've remained this dreary the whole way through.
I personally think Heart of the Swarm has the weakest campaign largely because the focus on hero units detracts from the Zerg experience. I think you really hit the nail on the head as to why SC2 no-build missions fall so flat for me.
the viewing experience is just fine. The entire section of the mission, when you compete against self-destruct timer and the zerg are swarming aroung is horror-like, and this darkness is making that experience better. I remember playing the original brood war as a kid, on this mission i was shitting bricks and surely invented some new curses.
I really liked the zerglings and infested terrans just boiling up out of the darkness too. Normally I prize the viewing experience highly, but sometimes setting a mood comes first.
I would love to see you play through Halo Wars 1 to have a look at its hero mechanics, I believe there are only 2 or 3 no build missions though, but in my opinion the second no build mission in the game is the best no build mission in any RTS I've played.
Would also like to see that.
Wasn’t that the one where you drive two grizzly tanks, I’ll be honest with you that mission wasn’t really that exciting cause driving two powerful units that can one shot nearly all infantry and those are the only thing they send at you, it just steam roll from A to B and back again
On Legendary they send regular packs of Hunters against them, so its not that easy task - you need to micro a lot more and save Canister shell for proper targets.
I think Halo without the wars is the best no build mission, personally.
No build missions are my favorite in RTS genre. Especially when a mission begins with a no-build segment where you have to secure a base. Ground Control 2 did this a lot and I really dig the game for it.
As for hero-heavy vs unit-heavy, my preference is just that it's micro heavy and not A-movable. Preferably some specialist units. Comandos franchise is an RTS that is literally made out of that kind of no-build missions.
I like the no-build missions like this one and the battlecruiser one, where you can do stuff that makes sense in-universe (hijacking goliaths, capturing buildings, etc) as a novel part of the missions.
Grant calling every episode #4 is like engineers rounding every mathematical constant to 3.
I loved the sc1 and wc3 no build missions.
In sc2 im devided, because in some cases the focus on the hero is nice, like when you take down the other pack leaders, but then it can actually trivialise the final mission, like in your speedrun.
I like the no build missions, the battecruiser and the protoss against turrets are my favorite
Gotta love how Duran manipulates DuGalle and Stukov to fight against each other. The Terran campaign is about betrayal inside a betrayal, all for the sake of an 'unknown' third party. Pretty similar to the Protoss campaign actually, only there it's Kerrigan pulling the strings and we as the player actually knowing it. Here we don't yet know who Duran actually is and thus don't get access to the complete picture until much later.
SC1 missions are definitely good, but the thing with WC3 no build missions is that the hero isn't some one off thing you get this one time. The levels and more importantly THE ITEMS, you collect carry through, 100% those missions and looking around for secrets has a real reward there, and it feels great. That's how WC3 did the gradient of success. Yes there were less troop escorts than in SC2, but the heroes were *significantly* more competent and important than in SC2. I think StarCraft II saw what went right in WC3 but instead of copying over the hero mechanics, decided to copy over the lower escorts and focus on heroes. I think the most popular no-build missions in SC2: For Aiur, Conviction, and Enemy Within are the ones with big armies that you crash in with, less of a hero focus even when Kerrigan is on the field; the fact that everyone loves these speaks volumes for a larger unit escort style.
A good counter example from another series is They Are Billions, which introduced heroes and the equivalent to installation missions in their campaign added after launch. As you could expect from that, they weren't exactly balanced to interact with the rest of the game, the 'proper' colony-building part. The heroes didn't actually participate in those, they were only for their own special missions, where you only got the hero and maybe, on the less annoying missions, a few supporting rescued troopers.
Your kill speed was so low, and TAB's name suggests its approach to zombie density, and so brutally slow kiting and punishments for error stack up to create some of the least satisfying combat loops conceivable. People suggested things like a persistent Homeworld-style squad of units that goes between each mission, giving you rewards for doing well and making everything matter, or a lot of other ideas, because in its current form it's just woeful. Really shows how even a good gameplay formula like the base TAB experience can be tilted into frustration.
This is probably my most remembered mission from brood war its so good makes you feel like an action hero movie hopping in the enemy mechs and using them to bolster your forces. And reactor meltdown stopping is just icing on the cake to Durans betrayal.
'Say goodnight, Stukov.'
I always loved that line. Especially when he actually say it in the Epilogue.
7:11 Not sure if this works in Mass Recall, but in Broodwar there was this funny trick to this mission, where you can have both your marines and the Goliaths.
It worked like this: Cloak Duran and let your troops walk back a bit so that they don't draw aggro of the Goliaths. Use solo Duran to proceed to Stukov. Once that is done, you can take over the blue player, including all the Goliaths they have activated.
One thing I do like about the Starcraft 2 no-build missions are the boss fights. Big telegraphed attacks that threaten to squash a dozen soldiers at once are something I didn't know I needed in my RTS. But I think you need a reasonably big army to make the micro interesting, and missions with just the heroes and no backup don't really cut it.
The heroes being a straight up one-man-army gets really tiresome... They got to the point in SC2 where you questioned why anything was difficult for the factions to accomplish or why they even had other troops nearby, as in terms of their in-game power even someone like Rory Swann with Betty could likely hold off the entire invasion from the Heart of the Swarm intro cinematic entirely solo.
I shouldn't have questions like "Why doesn't anyone else have access to Tychus' or Jim's 'nuke an entire hallway/room' grenades or rifle?" I shouldn't wonder why Artanis would sit in his mothership when he could probably solo In Utter Darkness entirely on foot. Then there's Kerrigan who doesn't even need anything said. Heroes are good when their power can help turn the tide, not when they are the entire ocean.
It's a lot of fun cruising around with them and clapping cheeks, don't get me wrong, but they make the rest of the world around them an absolute joke and the setting and story suffer the second you start thinking about it.
Have you considered any of the command and conquer games? If I recall correctly i believe it was zero hour that had a really neat no build mission where you started with a hero and four excellent cloaked anti infantry. Your goal is to reach a target to destroy it, but along the way you can branch off and rescue prisoners and stranded soldiers. If you keep these alive, you can even have them commandeer some abandoned vehicles later.
I also recall some in tiberium wars, one where gdi escorts a convoy but can choose to split some forces off to pursue a bonus objective, another where they assault a base and keeping engineers alive allows you to claim reinforcements. There's also a nod one where you have a small attack force that must secure some cargo and then hold out for extraction, with secondary targets scattered around the map to assist.
There's the iconic Tanya mission in RA2 that started you with just her spies and the mission was to disable 3 nukes guarded by the Soviets. That one always felt memorable to me.
I remember exactly the missions you're talking about - but with C&C you have to be careful, in RA1 and Tiberium Dawn the no-build missions were brutal and unforgiving. "Oh you lost 1 generic army unit, pity for you, start the mission again"
I personally don't actually think that focus on heroes is what makes a no-build mission bad or not. I think that the most important thing is that it is, like you said, a puzzle. And that you're required to use every single one of your units to the best of their abilities. In addition, truly great no build missions find ways to make optional objectives worth completing. The, in my opinion, best no-build missions Blizzard ever made was the Tomb of Sargeras and the Dalaran Prison, both from the Frozen Throne campaign of WC3. Because both of those missions contained a truly great mix of intense combats that relied on you knowing every single one of your unit's abilities. If you *just* used Maiev's abilities in the Tomb of Sargeras, and didn't micro your druids of the claw for heals and your dryads for poison, you were gonna have a bad time. And hell, even the puzzle aspects required more than *just* Maiev's blink. You need to use the huntress ability to see onto high-ground to get shadow orbs, which is just such a brilliant way to make an ability that would ordinarily be useless on a no-build mission useful. Dalaran prison was even better as far as fights go, using banishment to save injured units, priest dispels, sorcerer polymorphs, spellbreaker magic-stealing, it was the perfect army composition for *pure micro energy*
Compare that to SC2 hero missions. Walk Jimmity Bimmity through a lab, and lob grenades for an instant win. Prison break with Karah Serrigan, and don't even bother keeping your troops alive because you get them all back for free anyways. The problem isn't hero units, it's when the hero unit eclipses your other units in terms of usefulness... And a lack of cool side content. Linear no-build missions are boring as fuck.
I haven't played a lot of rts, but of them has pretty interesting no-build missions. Its Armies of Exigo. Jayborino played it. Missions are not puzzles, but they are different in concepts. I remember some of them:
1. You can hire some kind of heroic units, with unique abilities and auras, that are not available anywhere else in campaign. And also there is sidequest that gives you specialized units, useful for final battle, and one more heroic unit.
2. Mission built around necromancers. You have to kill enemies and make skeletons. But because skeletons are temporarily, you always have to fight in order to not lose army.
3. You are given a pack of shapeshifters and some basic units of faction. And almost at the start there is mercenary camp. So that you can choose in which units to shapshift, or maybe to use shashifters as casters.
4. You are given small army, but you can attack enemies' posts on your way to free units. And in the end there is resurrection building, that allows you to resurrect some of fallen units for the cost of resources, that you collected on your way. And optional boss fight, for resources and cool consumables as a reward.
5. You are on a rush to clear labyrinth faster than another group) That's it)
All this missions have heroes, but they are not that important.
I know, that nobody will read comment on 1 year old video, just wanted to share)
I think the secret to a good no build mission is to build it around the focus of your RTS. Starcraft and Broodwar were build around commanding generic units with great precision and control. Their no build missions are tests of your fine control and understanding of the exact abilities of those units, essentially being a test of micro and unit understanding. Heroes exist, but weren't particularly special, instead they were just generic units with a power boost.
Warcraft 3 is about powerful hero units supporting your more generic units, using them in tandem with each other, and the no build missions still maintain this focus, requiring you to use your heroic units to support and be supported by the generic units you were granted, it is also worth noting that the more generic units are designed with the expectation that they will need to fight heroic units as an inherent factor.
You can see the focuses of both these games just by popping online and playing PvP. I will also point out, WC3 units are REALLY tanky even on the squishy end compared to SC/BW/SC2 units.
Starcraft II is like its predecessor, its focused on the generic units. Yet the campaigns, especially during no build missions, keep trying to focus on something that the game as a whole isn't focused on, and that is the hero units. The game isn't built to support them, and so everything just goes a little bit wonky, and it produces a less satisfying experience.
I think part of this is something that was said by one of Blizzard's writers YEARS ago during a BlizCon when they were asked about why they kept retconning things, breaking their own lore, and pulling stuff out of their rear ends. That the "new" mentality (read this as everything released after Wrath of the Lich King) at Blizzard when concerning story, plot, characters and all of that is not on consistent solid lore or story, nor even considering the future of their plots, but on the rule of cool. That writing as many cool moments as possible is more important than following the lore or having a consistent plot, that having their "iconic characters" doing cool things is, in their opinions, more fun than a "story that follows some arbitrary rules", and while I agree sometimes it is better to fudge the lore a bit and allow some rule of cool, doing so all the time cheapens it all and makes anyone who didn't breeze through a problem using the "cool" in your face option seem kind of silly.
A constant focus on big gimmicks and cool heroic units going on a power trip with lots of abilities and wrecking the enemy as you attack move forward is an easy way to force "cool" moments, and a few of these would be fine, a favourite example of one of the coolest moments in all of SC2 for me is the first mission of LotV where you just attack move a big death ball around and reclaim the world from the zerg.
I think another issue is that focus on those "iconic characters", I personally don't find having Kerrigan, and the missions featuring Kerrigan are the worse offenders, go on a rampage and murder everything fun. It isn't exciting, it is watching the writer's waifu show off how cool she is. The game isn't designed around her, nothing is designed around heroic units in general when it comes to SC2, so by their nature just adding them in means that they slaughter everything you put in front of them, they are one step below a literal "I win" button. It is like playing a TTRPG and watching the GM's chosen NPC do all the cool stuff, no one likes that.
There's no mission in SC2 that heavily featured a heroic unit that I felt I earned my brutal difficulty completion on, there was no sense of power from them, because a feeling of power for me comes from the destruction of a great foe through my power, even if it meant playing dirty on my part and cheesing it, a foe needs to be a worthy opponent before there is any sense of power to be derived from it. Kerrigan, by her nature, robs me from the possibility of having a worthy opponent, and it isn't even like you can just not use her, in no build missions she is basically mandatory, and it other missions even if I didn't use her I still wouldn't feel powerful, because I know deep down I gave my opponent a handicap, I overcame nothing by not using my win button, I wasn't conquering a worthy foe by holding back, I was kicking a helpless child a bit more gently so that I could prolong its suffering. Even if I decided to just mass some stupidly OP cheesy army and use it, there is still more of a sense that I achieved the victory and over came by enemy, even if by BS means, than there is by having something like Kerrigan be there to act as an over powered murder machine, as the developers just handed her to me for no effort on my part, not even the smallest bit, and said "use this and win".
Though, there are still missions featuring heroic units to a heavy degree I liked, one being Belly of the Beast, another was Piercing the Shroud. This is because the heroes in them weren't particularly powerful, and also they were just better designed for said heroes. The final no build of LotV also does this well, but still not well enough in my opinion. Nothing in HotS does this well though, because the Kerrigan power trip feeling is far too strong.
"... As stinky as the fruit you're named after." - Grant
Excellent quote to end with!
If you play with optional heroes you get Dugalle in the Alexander for the next mission which is actually quite fun. It's something I'd recommend if you want to do a proper slog towards the Overmind instead of trying to cheese it.
I really enjoyed the juxtaposition of discussing the lackluster no build missions in Starcraft 2 against the backdrop of this mission, which seems like one of the best no-build missions that Blizzard has made.
I think sometimes hero focused ones can be good from a story perspective (Kerrigan vs pack leaders) but a lot of the times its, "oh my troops died lmao i don't care because i have an overpowered hero unit that can solo the mission anyway".
While I could barely make out even health bars watching this on mobile, I have to admit that the lighting in the second half was really pleasant to play in.
Mandatory comment saying I love this playthrough and thank you so much for all the content you provide.
7:26 I like this part, it's really cool.
What I like about SC1 heroes is that all of them are just augmented regular units who have more of a kick and are a little tougher and cant take on maybe 2-3 units before being overwhelmed. While in SC2 a heroic unit can take armies and bases solo.... In SC1 the only heroic unit who might do more damage than most on infantry level would be Zerg Kerrigan who actually has a unique character model and does not resemble any unit in the game
Agree. I think Grant sometimes mentions that heros are better done in SC2 because they have more abilities, but they ruin the balance of the campaing quite a bit. WC3 focusses more in smaller armies and items and there the heros work quite well (specially because the opponent have their own). I think Mass recall does a good Job here adding small abilities to the heros that arent game breaking, like Blink Zeratul or speed boost Artanis. What i would add as well is a retirement/respawning mechanic for build segments, but otherwise the heros are pretty well fitting in SC1/Mass Recall
"13:35" many youtubers often don't remember we mobile users exist... Thanks for acknowledging our existance Grant
About good RTS games with good no build missions. There's this Polish game called Polanie 2, or Knightshift if we are talking about a version released everywhere else. Besides having a main hero in a campaign, who levels up and gets access to better equipment, your normal troops also level up and get new armour, weapons, better dmg and higher health. So it's useful to keep alive some of your warriors and allow them to level up with you. Kinda like in Original War. There are quite a lot of these no build missions in that game, so in time it almost becomes a quasi squad based game.
The Command and Conquer games have some interesting takes on no-builds and some restricted-build missions (restricted as in you sorta have a base of operations and a way to make income but you can expand and your tech tree is heavily restricted).
Tiberium sun has some good no-build missions; some good no-build prologues to missions (the GDI mission to rescue the mutant leader from the hospital that turns into a full on macro mission after 15 minutes of tense commando work comes to mind).
G&G Generals has some fun no-builds, but mostly theyre restricted builds
Hey Grant, I'm doing pretty bad right now. Your videos do make it a little better, so I wanted to thank you for that.
To be fair to the binary 'hero dies you lose' mission structure in SC2, it was designed with a robust system of manual and auto saves in mind. A lot of the custom content you get into runs through the Arcade or whatever heathen multiplayer thing SC2 runs, that doesn't allow such saving. So some of those missions can feel a lot more punishing than was perhaps ever intended by the developers. The same way we can't really blame them if the rewind mod sometimes just messes up. Then I'd say it's on the mod makers to account for this new balance, my favorite adaptation to this is still in WoL: Protoss Co-Op Edition, where you got lives for heroes. Still means there's a consequence for failure, but only repeated failure rather than a gotcha autoloss.
Your general point I totally agree with, though. I genuinely admire how Brood War refines the idea of no-build missions from the base game and makes them shine, whereas SC2 tried to do something that Starcraft was never intended for. Sometimes it's fun, but the game really is about masses of ordinary troops from each faction going at it rather than legendary shining heroes who do everything. Also, obligatory praise for the writing. Everything ties together and wraps up so well, it's as much of a treat to watch these missions knowing what's coming, because then you can see all the little things the developers put in to foreshadow.
MR is certainly bold with its choices of songs from other sources. Never expected to hear March to Doom from Command & Conquer.
I can't believe this mod decided to make the health bars hard to see in the dark.
MR made a lot of questionable visual decisions. There's the darkness in these installation missions, and stuff like the landscaping in some of the levels where they made deep valleys that were hard to navigate through. Stuff that look sorta cool part negatively impact gameplay.
I like a lot of the Frozen Throne no-builds, and some of the Starcraft 2 no-builds that feel like more of a puzzle than an attrition simulator. I think those missions should reward your knowledge of the mission and the game overall and have multiple failsaves that still make you feel like you deserved to pull through. It's a tough one, because with that logic you are not really making an RTS level, but rather a puzzle level. Works to break up the pacing a little, which is fun.
Stukov would've lived if the medics remember they're medics
One of my favorite no build missions is from company of heroes 2 (a ww2 rts) called "tiger hunting" you're given a small amount of units and have to navigate this small town looking for explosives and any abandoned anti tank guns to take down this tiger tank That's after you. Even after you kill the the tiger, you have to repair it, recrew it, and keep it alive to the end of the mission as enemy reinforcements arrive to reclaim it.
I think hero focused can work if it fits thematically. For example, the protoss make sense for hero focused missions. It fits the lore of small protoss forces being disproportionately powerful. At the same time for a group like the zerg it doesn't work as well, because the swarm is thematically about a bunch of interchangeable parts.
Also IMHO, heros are better when the are support that make small squads better. Be it healing auras, buffs, or special abilities that would let otherwise vulnerable troops survive.
When into non hero missions, level like the Battle of Braxis or Dylarian Shipyards are a great template. Using specific units to pick apart fixed defenses, is a rewarding puzzle.
I think In the Enemy's Shadow is one of the best no build missions in an RTS. Despite it giving you one unit, Nova can be so many different units, and is tough enough that mistakes can be fixed with quick reflexes. Makes it very fun to play.
I like hero focus, for sure. But along the Warcraft 3 model with a persistent customizable hero (HotS sort of did that). But also having a spectrum of success like you indicated with the BCs is a huge plus. Warcraft 3 did a good job with secret bosses and the like for item drops.
I remember having issue with several sc1 no-build missions as they have a hero, don't have a way to heal the hero, and feel dependent on you having the hero to tank.
I like the Tosh mission in SC2, pushing with your ally
I think I would go with either small army + reinforcements, or hero + ally
Im quite a fan of the infiltration style no build missions, like in covert ops (maybe with less cheese)
something that can really help with designing these atmospheric lighting missions is having light aura's or flashlights on your units
Warcraft 3 has my favorite no build missions, but I think that has more to do with the relative power level of hero's vs army. I like the idea of having maybe a couple hero units who you take through, and as strong as they are, they do still need their army to accomplish the objective.
The second to last mission of Homeworld: Desserts of Kharak is good, you have the science officer Rachel s'jet and a small Escort of garbage units Rachel can barely fight and is support focused and she has a few armored assults, a baseruner, a couple of railguns, and some LAVs. You need to defend untill your carrier arrives, but enemy railguns quickly kill your armoured assults and the LAVs are useless, you need to micro really well, use the baseruner to put turrets in Good positions, and use Rachel's EMP optimaly.
Gradients of success is the phrase that had been missing.
In SC1 Protoss campaign, proper use of Tassadar's abilities and patience can net you about 14 marines, 5 zealots, and like 3 dragoons. Yes, the mission has a lot of troll traps set by the developers which... are kind of bull TBH, but you can see that concept of "gradients of success" in that A LOT more.
The UED Blockade in the SC:BW Protoss campaign has that in spades, and so does the Dylarian shipyards.
Someone else mentioned that SC1 no build missions often were puzzles that focused around the proper usage of each of the regular units you got, thereby successfully blending strategy aspects of an RTS with the MUCH more puzzle focused level design. I agree with that 100%. I will say however that this really wasn't until Broodwars. SC1 vanilla had rather lackluster no build missions. Raynor's Command Center infiltration which... was just, A+move to the end, since you only had marines and firebats (and a marine Raynor). The Amerigo (Kerrigan's mission) in which the focus was again very linear, with just Hunter Killer everything and Kerrigan move to end beacon. And lastly the Protoss mission where you go inside an infested command center with Tassadar, in which the focus was once again the Hero, although it is felt a lot less because Tassadar's slow movement and attack speed makes him a lackluster combat unit and often insufficient to tackle the ambushes ahead. SC:BW on the other hand only really had the first Protoss mission which felt like the focus was the hero. The rest were handled spectacularly, even the no build segments, like the Psi Emitter SCV in the Kerrigan Campaign.
StarCraft 2 feels like they looked at StarCraft 1 and Warcraft 3 for their no build misisons, but neglected Broodwars and focused on "Rule of Cool" as opposed to limited resource management and strategy.
There is another RTS game you might consider trying if you haven't, called Warzone 2100. It's a pretty even split, where about half of the missions are "no build missions" where you bring in a limited number of units (of your own choosing) and must complete the objective, with a bit of X-COMs experience mechanic where, if your troops live through enough missions they become far more powerful, but only if you can keep them alive through the campaign. If they die, they die.
It's also one of the first RTS games (circa 2000) to use a full 3D game engine, something StarCraft didn't get for another ten years!
I think I left something in discord with more details.
I'd be interested to see what you think of the game.
Command and Conquer does no build missions real well. Because they have veterancy system so the games reward keeping units alive and allow for use of elite forces. Most no-build maps I remember (from RA2, RA3, CnC3 and Kane’s Wrath) are also terrained brilliantly
I pretty much agree with you, no build missions with a big chunk of army is better.
This is mainly because a no build mission, to me, should be a question of "heres an army. Micro like maru. Have fun". Throwing in a bit of an extra puzzle and stuff can add to that, but the puzzles focus should be mainly just using the triops you've been given.
Thats not to say heros can't add to the experience, they can, but you have to manage and design them pretty carefully. You can't have them be too strong, or have a particularly powerful healing effect so you can just hammer through any puzzles. But you can give them a selection of abilities which let you micro and puzzle solve with them better than a regular unit.
That all Being said, the occasional "heres a hero, go bash through this level" mission can be quite fun, if the hero is intresting enough.
One of my favorite no build missions is the first mission of lotv, where you gat a giant death army and start going around killing things. Maybe that is just, because this kind of mission is unique in sc2, but I don't think so, I generall enjoy playing with large armies, where it is all about positioning more, than small ones, where I have to micro individual units.
I personally don't mind hero-centric no build missions, as long as they retain that puzzle aspect. For example, the WoL mission where you control Tosh and need to help the AI Jimbo build a base and push through the prison.
There's a similar style of mission in the second mission of C&C Red Alert 3's allied campaign, where player 1 uses a commando unit and infiltrator units to achieve secondary objectives around the map and disabling the enemy naval forces while player 2 (controlled by an AI in single player) has control of a full base and essentially plays a regular macro mission.
I think an in between approach suits best, to avoid having missions become repetitive. Sometimes having a hero's life decide the result is a good target, while other times having a hero as a support unit is better.
I feel like the no build missions in starcraft 1 somehow have more story/worldbuilding than sc2 even though them protoss wont shut up about some prophecy. The characterisation of the marine or the depiction of the sheepyards make the world feel so much more alive than :" KERRIGAN, HOW COULD WE HAVE KNOWN?!"
Regarding no build missions, I agree, that StarCraft 1 has more fun no build missions than StarCraft 2 because the heroes are not as overpowered so, you do actually have to watch out for them and smartly use your other troops. Compare the mission where Kerrigan rescues Jim to the mission where Tassadar rescues Zeratul. In the former, there is barely any tension, you can pretty much solo the mission with Kerrigan and the other troops are just buffer. In the latter you actually feel tension, you have to smartly use your abilities and every unit counts.
I remembered that on this mission I would leave a guy near the SCV, not getting them mind you and when the zerg came he would say that he would like to tag along and I would still get an SCV but now a guy that was unkillable and I would just send him to the objective. I thought that I was way cool haha.
i really love these sc1/mass recall no-build missions (from what ive seen from you)
Id even like more without heroes or the hero is allowed to die / "incapacitated" and then you just have to beat the rest of the mission without them - would add an extra optional challenge (instead of just restarting)
There's a mission in one of the Extras in Mass Recall where you gain the Night Vision button. Do the dark environment if you must, but give the player tools to counter it. Imagine having to switch it off to see the walls, but switch it on to detect enemy Zerg?
Its also good to compare the original No Build missions in Starcraft Original to the Broodwar Expansion no build missions. They are completely different in my opinion and I'd argue the Broodwar versions are MASSIVE improvements because:
The missions are more story driven and the characters are more well liked.
- Units discover things (Raynor discovers confeds have zerg in the lab, units interacting with other units). A lot of them give a feel of an actual RPG element style in an RTS without
- Puzzle missions (similar to the Impossible Series of custom games). Using units smartly is usually always fun.
The Starcraft 2 version is very linear of: "You know what you are doing and its pretty straight forward of I go here and I progress" The progress isn't even that impactful because the unit lines are pretty generic and the characters themselves may not even be that engaging. When Kerrigan become Primal Kerrigan, not only is she overpowered, it serves more as a "tutorial" mission of how to use her kit and to just show how she can kill stuff. It kinda sells the, "she is really strong" which we already know.
In Starcraft 1 Terran Scenario 7 BW (this mission), you can see the marines interacting with others and requesting medics, bombing doors, and handing out orders. It gives the roll-playing sense and also makes it feel more realistic and enjoyable as a response. It is also why I dislike the Kerrigan Installation mission in Starcraft Original because it feels more of a generic "kill stuff and move forward." The closest thing to a no-build mission that is good would be the Secret Mission in Starcraft 2 and is the only one that is "good." since it has story elements to it.
I really liked the darkness in this game, when playing it myself. and I think that the player experience still matters more in mod making.
also Mass Recal has enough other stuff to show off what it does, to make people interested in checking it out
I am with you with the hero mission in sc1/bw. but another thing I really liked about the "infiltration missions" or "indoor missions" in sc1 is that they actually feel like you are inside a building, like the corridors are narrow and you don't find any big or flying units there with the exception of ultras wich where in a big holding room. feels a lot more immersive than freeing toshes boys and having to gun down a mercenary battlecruiser and approximatly 30 freaking ravens with a canister gun in the process. I liked all the custom wall guns and other forms of detection and damage they put in.
This might be controversial, but I think no-build missions tend to shine in RTS games that have no hero units or their hero units are not that much different from regular units. For me some of the best no-build missions I had were in games like Command and Conquer Red Alert 2 and Emperor: Battle for Dune, though those missions were super rare and you got like 1 or 2 for the entire campaign.
As an exception to this rule I would also say Warcraft 3, but that's only because the game was specifically designed around hero play, so every mission that makes the heroes shine feels exceptionally well.
You want good no build missions? You need to shift genres a little, but the TBS Advanced Wars series did it quite well. Like, it was a fairly common thing “predeployed” missions. And I like them, more careful strategy, less industrial “the one with the bigger infrastructure wins” attrition stuff”
honestly, a lot of the visceral appeal of an RTS, to me, is simply getting to command an army. no-build missions that give you a sizeable force and opportunities to expand it throughout the scenario capture the essence of the gameplay better than those that give you one or more hero characters to babysit with a few bodyguards.
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds (the AOE reskin) has a bunch of solid no-builds where you’re just accumulating this ball of death
I agree on "gradient of success" comment, and it really extends to all missions, no-build or not. A lot of WC3/FT campaigns achieve this with hidden items that carry over to your next missions (I think that 'carrying-over' part is especially important). SC2 campaigns have this mechanic as well with zerg/protoss research, solarite etc., but it doesn't feel as much as a direct reward, perhaps because they're simply points that has no difference whether you get from mission A or mission B, and there is really no exploring around--you already know what points you'll get and how.
A really cool mechanic would be to influence future missions themselves based on your performance, kinda like how you choose between nukes/battlecruisers on Korhal (Brood War UED campaign) but based on performance rather than choice.
Also, not all SC2 no-build missions are too hero-focused and boring. Some certainly are, but in Nova mission on WoL, for example, you can't just go ham with Nova but is rather a puzzle mission. I think this is the best approach for SC2 case. Hero is important and unique, but your army is essential as well. At least it's better than SC1 approaching this problem by making heroes just glorified units, which I think is boring--there is no point having them around at all rather than just...more units.
By the way, I really enjoy your content. Thank you for the videos!
Agree on everything you said about no build missions but I just love The Belly of the Beast. No good reason. Just pure love.
The Problem about Hero Units in RTS lies in the battlefield they are on, if you want to have large scaled battles they need to be overpowered in some way - otherwise they get killed easily and you lose.
On the other hand if you want to use them in no build missions they are either "the brute forcer" or "the fleeting burden" because most of the no build missions are still combat heavy instead of puzzles where you need to use your heroes abilities to commence.
Novas covert Ops has some missions where you need to relie heavily on her abilities (as long as you are no speed runner of course :D), and that was a nudge in the right direction, could have been more focused on her abilities and the gear you unlocked.
Currently I'm playing Spellforce 1, and there you always have your most overpowered asset - your Avatar - and some maps doesn't give you troops at all, you have to manage that one strong but still killable unit all on its own, and the maps are specifically designed for that - without a power fantasy in mind (which is why SC2 Heroes feel overpowered/overhyped)
It is a RTS-RPG mix though and is designed to have that Hero always there. (even in Multiplayer - imagine SC2 tournaments when the hero units would be available for standard skirmish)
i really like the no build missions from They are billions because even tho you have a strong hero if you missmanage it will die pretty easily so most of the time you have to look for enviroment things to help you (like a explosive barrel , a way to activate a trap or something to help you ) it really encorages you to explore everything of the level
(sorry for bad english)
I think no-build missions should reward the player for keeping units alive but also for looking around the map for maybe more units or an easier access to the objective. The command and conquer games did it really well in my opinion. Especially some "newer" ones like Tiberium Wars or even Generals.
Well, if I remember correctly, Cossacks 1 (I did not played other ones yet) had A LOT no build missions, and there are no heroes, and you are on clock because of food and usually ammunition shortage (look up how the in-game resources work) :D So you HAVE to be effective there.
I really like the belly of the beast mission in StarCraft 2 even if you basically only have heroes with the rescuable marines, medics and firebats. It is really fun hitting the boss with a decently sized army and 4 heroes making you feel successful for thinking on your feet to save them before they get over run. Although I have not played much starcraft 1 and no mass recall (I don't get how to download) so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
if I remember correctly, Empire earth has one campaign with a really neat no build mission. however I would have to go back and check and I do not have access to the game at the moment unfortunately.
Just saw a video about Warcraft RE-reforged, maybe a good thing for you to run?
You say you prefer the SC1 no build missions because they give you more troops.
Whats your opinion on the Bonus mission in WoL? I feel like that one strikes a fair balance between hero unit and troops being important.
Yes Gerard, Alexei is definitely betraying you by activating the Psi Disrupter to disrupt the Zerg that you haven't even enslaved yet. And yes Alexei, "inform the Admiral I have a personal matter to take care of" is definitely better than texting him "Duran betrayed us". And then there's the Captain, who saw what happened an Aiur, including being overrun by the Zerg coming from Duran's abandoned position, just as Stukov predicted, but said nothing.
As for the no-build missions, I don't consider the Dylarian Sheepyards to be representative of SC1's no-build missions. They're the odd one out, being much more explicitly a puzzle, and the only one which outright allows you to fail a segment. You're right that heroes make a difference when jumping to HotS and LotV, but which one is better comes down to preference. For some, it's more fun to have a broken hero. It removes the attrition aspect, but lets the mission pit you against huge hordes that could still burst you down.
Regardiing your question about games that also have no build missions. They are Billions has a campaign that has like 5 of them iirc. They are just really badly designed. Imagine a map filled with basic infected terran and I mean filled, like at least a thousand. And all you have is Jimmy from the first mission of wings of liberty. So all you can do is slowly kyte units around the map as you pool packs appart.
Sometimes they give you a couple units from a bonus objective but that is it. And then in later misssions there are enemies that can affectively oneshot your guy the second you f up.
My conclusion is that SC2 no build missions are still on the high end in regards to quality. At least they give you some units. Though there the heroes are also just so damn strong.
Looking back, I think a big part of why WC3 heroes felt better is because of the context. In a high fantasy setting, the 500 year old paladin standing as a bulwark against the slaves of an ancient dark power fits well. In a sci-fi adventure, having one guy with a gun cleaving his way through assault vehicles can create a pretty serious disconnect between that hero and the surrounding elements.
You can still use heroes effectively, though. Having, say, Edmund Duke in his tank serving as the center point of a largely infantry-based force would let you have a hero be really powerful and important while still keeping a lot of focus on the other units. Even in LotV, the ability to to quick-drop Talandar onto critical points and then warp him back out works fairly well to have him feel really powerful without him just breaking apart the setting.
As a viewer, I love the cinematic style that they go for. I find blander mods that don't dare having more contrast and complex lightening to be a lot less appealing to watch and on thumbnails.
The cinematic lighting can be nice, but when i can't even see the healthbars of the goliaths it's clearly gone too far. It should definitely be toned back a bit.
I feel like a no-build mission should be more like an adventure than a classic mission. Exploration, puzzles and fun interactions should be the name of the game.
age of mythology has a couple of no build missions (more if you could the beginning of some missions), but they are usually strange and have 'special mechanics'.
there was this one strange mission i dont really have strong feelings about where you turn regular units into much stronger myth units my taking them to one of 5 or so temples which you gradually unlock as you explore the map.
there was a 'build mission' but since you have 6 heros and one of them can heal you can basically hard push your way to the end on normal if you take breaks to heal and split enemy unit groups in half
If you're after some good RTS games, origin is currently selling the entire Command and Conquer franchise for cheap, $20AU. My personal favourite is Tiberium Sun, has some great no build missions.
Never felt like SC2 no-built missions were worse than in BW, but Grant has a point too.
I'd highly recommend checking out some real-time tactics games.
Because they stay away from RTS tropes like base building and resource management, basically every mission is a no-build mission.
I don't have much experience with the genre, but I remember liking the Myth series when I was younger. (Though I was terrible and probably never finished any of them. lol)
I love how Gerard and Alexei are supposed to be these lifelong friends, and they have zero communication skills.
I think coh1 and 2’s no build missions in the base game, expansions, and theatre of war games are pretty fun, you might like them.
If you want a game that is just entirely no-build missions check out Dawn of War 2. You get 6 squads each specializing in different things but can only bring 4 on a mission, each squad is unique and offers different utilities. The game also has some light rpg elements where each squad has a customizable level up system and you can swap out their equipment to further customize them.
You don't kill scientists, yet you eagerly kill defenseless animals at a given chance, lol
I have a theory about this mission. If you pay attention, no one actually calls the player "Captain" during the first part, and the Captain was on Aiur with Stukov when Duran betrayed them, so I think for once, you're not actually playing as the Captain in the first part of the mission, and that the Captain is actually with Stukov's forces until they join back up with DuGalle.
Fun fact if you somehow make it to the end without killing any of stukov’s forces you can actually go back and recruit them after triggering the cutscene
Patriot's Blood continues to be just one of the best no-build missions in RTS history.