Talk: Co-op Missions

"Special Scenarios"

Will these special scenarios be mini-campaigns filled with delicious lore info?

Basically, is this a revival of the old Enslaver styled mini-campaigns only being co-op and using SC2 campaign mechanics? --Shadow Archon (talk) 01:41, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Hasn't been specified. Doubt it though.--Hawki (talk) 06:13, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

New Source

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/19829510/

I sadly don't have time to all all the infos

GoldenApple NB (talk) 16:20, August 6, 2015 (UTC)

Canon of Co-Op Missions

I was in the process of making a banner so I'd figure I'd ask; the recent patch added a lot more lore flavor to the co-op missions. I wanted to add a lot of the newer lore bits, but I was going to make an info banner stating that co-op missions were ambiguously canon since you get situations like Raynor and Kerrigan defending the Shakuras temple from Moebius, which is fairly irreconcilable. So how canon do we consider co-op missions to be? Subsourian (talk) 19:37, December 15, 2015 (UTC)

I don't think the missions need a co-op banner, but we can use {{AmbigCanon|Co-Op Missions}}; how we treat the missions' lore is covered in the site's canon policy (basically, treat them as canon as long as they don't contradict anything, and one should always use the term "allied forces" rather than drawing reference to any specific commander). That said, the ambigcanon template would be good to use.--Hawki (talk) 21:26, December 15, 2015 (UTC)

Source on new Co-op Commanders?

Prison, you just added a bunch of datamined commanders but didn't source them. Googling has revealed nothing on them being datamined. Where are you getting this info? Subsourian (talk) 19:25, December 22, 2015 (UTC)

In the editor, there is a lot of quotes of interation with commanders, here a image: http://imgur.com/RKyFGK0--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 19:29, December 22, 2015 (UTC)

The Imgur one has shown me pictures of giraffes and kitty kats (hah hah), but no commanders I'm afraid. Anyway, I'm fine with them being listed, as long as they're sourced. At this point in time, the page doesn't meet the cut.--Hawki (talk) 21:24, December 22, 2015 (UTC)

The problem is, I don't know how to source the editor... I can say to you how to find the quotes if you want. Search in the editor (with co-op mod dependency) for: XCommander_Lock2 (instead of "X" write the name of a released commander (Raynor, Swann, Kerrigan, Zagara, Artanis, Vorazun or Karax) and you will find quotes about them with others commanders, for exemple, there is a file called: SwannCommander_Lock2Abathur, that is Swann talking with Abathur in Co-Op missions.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 07:42, December 23, 2015 (UTC)

I've re-organized/sourced it. At some point the tidbits can be added to the respective character pages.--Hawki (talk) 08:10, December 23, 2015 (UTC)

Mutators and Mastery Levels

Running this by other editors. I don't think mastery levels need their own article, but rather, the traits can be listed on each individual commander article as the points allow (similar to abilities and upgrades). That said, I think mutators should have their own article, as a means of listing each mutation. However, it would also require listing mutators on mission articles. Potentially we could skip out article creation and simply list them on missions. However, if mutators are non-recycling (e.g. if they only come around once), the list would be beneficial for posterity.--Hawki (talk) 08:59, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

I got the impression that mutators would recycle and the same one could be used for multiple weekly events (albeit not the same combination). Either way having a central list of all mutators so far would be beneficial, and I don't think it'd be a problem listing it both on a central page and in the respective map articles.Subsourian (talk) 12:10, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

Co-op vs. Multiplayer

Do Multiplayer unit updates affect Co-op Mission units in StarCraft 2, or are they considered separated from each other as with Campaign units? --Falconeye (talk) 23:59, August 27, 2016 (UTC)

Don't think so, usually co-op has their own balance patches, and work like campaign in that they're in isolation (WoL still has 60 damage siege tanks). Having said that I don't know how the revamp (IE changing the Cyclone in its entirely) is going to impact co-op. Subsourian (talk) 16:17, August 28, 2016 (UTC)

Fourth Commander Classification?

With the introduction of Stukov, Blizzard seems to be preparing to release "hybrid" commanders. I won't argue with his current classification but I think we should consider a 4th category if there are any other hybrid commanders released. Thoughts? Juice7739 (talk) 01:27, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Largely depends, if we got someone like Duran/Narud I'd be ok with putting him in a fourth category. But aside from them either going into Gestalts or making new lore up I don't know what other hybrid commanders they could really do. In the meantime I've just been going off of what interface and announcers the commanders use as the final indicator of race, but I'd like to hear everyone else's thoughts. Subsourian (talk) 04:28, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Agree with Sub. Haven't played with Stukov yet, but I'd still classify him as zerg more than anything else. If similar commanders are released in the future, we can re-organize the list.--Hawki (talk) 07:08, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Oblivion Express Category

For curiosity's sake, why is Oblivion Express categorized as a siege mission? You're not defending the trains from onslaught or anything like that, and the trains aren't fixed points. Shouldn't it fall under the control category due to the need for map control or something?--Psi-ragnarok (talk) 18:20, January 31, 2018 (UTC)

Personally I'm not a fan of categorizing them this way in general. Some are obvious like defense missions, but as they mix up mechanics it becomes more and more personal opinion as these aren't put out by Blizzard. --Subsourian (talk) 18:42, January 31, 2018 (UTC)

The trains and their escorts, at least the ones tied to the main objective, run very close to the players' bases. One tactic in dealing with them is to set up static defenses along the track near the choke point to your base, and sending your armies to deal with the train escorts. As such, you're more or less defending these positions from the train, its escorts, and the scripted enemy offensives on your base.

But yeah, the exact category that Oblivion Express falls under is a matter of opinion, since there's no official take on it. Categorizing each Co-Op mission can help give readers a general idea on what to expect when launching it.

~XenoDarth~ 04:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Vermillion

Can we consider Vermillion as a "serious" discussion? Because when they talked about him look like Monk was just joking, and not considering him to be a true commander.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 15:50, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

In the last interview I cited it seemed more serious. I took out stuff like Carbot Zerglings, but Donny has both been brought up a number of times and was rattled off between serious suggestions.

Also find the interview where they said Niadra, not that I don't believe you but that way I can cite it and it doesn't look like they discussed Niadra in the interview I cited for the section. --Subsourian (talk) 15:54, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

I'm search the interview right now, if I find it, I will post here. Btw, will be not more right add a note about the possibility that Vermillion is a joke? Because, seriously, he is really odd to me (I can be wrong, I know, but Vermillion and Terry are became more a meme then other)--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 16:46, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

It's subjective I admit, but the fact it seems both moderately reasonable considering the silliness of Co-op mixed with the amount of times they mention it means that I think it's worth including. I don't think we should note it's likely a joke since that means we'd need to include every joke they make, including stuff like Carbot Zergling and Lowko. The same fun they've poked at it can also be seen in Stetmann, who they have been serious about including as a commander.

Having said that I'll keep an eye on interviews. If it's obvious that they're messing around on that this BlizzCon, I'll remove it. If I can I may corner Monk and see if I can get anything approaching an answer but I doubt it. --Subsourian (talk) 13:06, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

Well, for Stetmann there is data ingame, so, he is more likely--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 14:29, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

Effects of difficulty level

Hi, I would be interested to know more about the effects the difficulty level in those missions.
I recently played in Hard a whole game for the first time, and was surprised to see the game speed was set as faster than "Faster" setting.
If the effect on damage/rate of fire/hp and others is modified by a consistent known multiplicator, would be interesting if it was mentioned somewhere too.
--UndeadStarSC (talk) 05:42, June 23, 2020 (UTC)

While building a custom map with the Co-Op dependency, I stumbled onto some very interesting information. So hold on to your butts, as this is long explanation.

You know how you can choose the mission difficulty before queuing for Co-op? Sometimes, especially if you've been queuing for a while, you end up with a partner with a different difficulty setting. You can see what their selection is by mousing over one of their units and reading the tooltip.

Each Co-op map contains two player slots - P3 and P4 - that are reserved for AI enemies. What's interesting is that their difficulty setting is dependent on the human players' selections. P3's AI difficulty corresponds to P1's selection, and P4's corresponds to P2's. P3 and P4's difficulty affects how strong their respective entrenched positions are throughout the map - some units are removed or not replenished as often, if at all, on easier difficulties. If P1 chose a harder difficulty setting than P2, the two of them might find it easier to attack enemy positions on P2's side of the map compared to P1's side.

This also affects attack waves aimed at each player (their ultimate destination is usually their respective starting location or natural expansion). Following the aforementioned example, attack waves toward P1 would be stronger compared to attacks on P2, although it will be hard to tell the difference since P3 and P4 share the same name and color. Notice how in most Co-Op maps there are usually two choke points that lead directly to each player's starting base. Good examples of such include Part and Parcel, Mist Opportunities, and Chain of Ascension.

Additionally, the strength of attacks targeting your trucks in Cradle of Death are also dependent on their respective players' difficulty choices. And if a player selected Brutal, a mineral patch or two on their starting base or natural may be removed.

But therein lies a problem. Mission objectives aren't really tied to a specific player. What if the two players have different difficulty settings? Which should the map choose? Well, there exists a function that handles that decision. Let's say that each difficulty level from Casual to Brutal is represented by a numerical value. Take the average of the two difficulty selections and round down the result to the nearest integer. That's your "composite" difficulty. Some maps call that function and store the result in a variable called MechanicDifficulty. So a freak Brutal-Casual player combo would most likely have the mechanic difficulty set to Normal.

Mechanic difficulty determines the difficulty of shared objectives. For example, in Void Launch, the number of shuttles allowed to escape without the mission failing, the strength of the unit composition acting as shuttle escorts, and the maximum life and shields of each shuttle are all dependent on the mechanic difficulty.

I'm not sure how difficulty affects game speed though. My guess is that it's dependent on mechanic difficulty, since it affects everyone. Perhaps Normal game speed is used in Casual/Normal, while Faster is used for Hard/Brutal.

~XenoDarth~ 03:36, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Party mode

I'm curious about what the "party" mode change.
Beyond it being necessary to play "Custom mutation" and maybe for Brutal +X (I think I caught a glimpse of that, though Brutal and above scare me away), I'm not sure what exact effect it has. Does it effectively prevent you to run into random players? Or just increase the probability of playing with members of the party? Are party only of 2?
I'm curious about all that, so if anybody got answers, I would be glad to see them here, or in the article if you're confident in your ability to structure it and all there.
-- UndeadStarSC (talk) 09:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

You can only have two members - yourself included - if you want to play Co-op with a party. No more, no less. My guess on the reasoning behind it is that since you're working with someone you can easily communicate with, especially if you know them IRL, the two of you will have greater teamwork during the mission. Also, party members can see each other's commander selections, so they can use commanders that they're experienced with and have excellent synergy.

Missions on Brutal+ difficulty and above run on "normal" Brutal, in addition to mutators chosen randomly when it begins. There will always be at least two mutators in effect. Obviously there are more mutators available that can be harder to deal with as you go up in Brutal+. The full list of possible mutators, which ones can be chosen at each tier of Brutal+, and the source of the information in this paragraph can be found here. It even has simulator that can display possible mutation combos for each Brutal+ tier that you may encounter, running on a similar algorithm that the game itself uses.

~XenoDarth~ 04:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)