I've seen this mentioned a few times with respect to 'how SC2 was good'. I'm really not sure I agree. Imho there wasn't a whole lot which was good about SC2 (with the exception of some of the experimental ideas which worked well e.g. the unit cannon and the cybran navy with legs - devaluing experimentals though...). Unit upgrades was a feature I quite liked but having Rockhead tanks be kinda your only tanks? I hated this. I was a fan of the TA and SC tech trees which provided a wide variety of units to play with as it kept things fresh throughout the length of the game. I was also a massive fan of the early game units like Stumpy's in TA and Marines in SC (nothing quite makes me smile like air dropping marines to harass power plants and mines early doors). Even in the later game I find mixing early game units into large forces quite handy. Certainly in TA they provide a brilliant distraction from a main force so the enemy's higher level point defences waste rounds on weak units like K-bots, saving your Sumos or Cans from taking hits and allowing them to close in. More than anything though this provides visual variety which means you don't have to stare at the same 5 land units all game, every game. I think that visual progression is important (borderlands would be case in point here; despite the fact that borderlands had 'a Bazillion guns', the reality is what feels like ~50 guns with lots of different stats - hence why GB spent so long creating unique visual styles for weapons in BL2). The only thoughts I had on compromise here was that perhaps you could have a 'Recycler' structure which allowed you to pour your little units into and spit out higher level units. Or, perhaps you could simply combine 4 level 1 k-bots to create a level 2 k-bot in-field (ala Fortress Maximus in transformers). This way you could keep the visual progression from low end units to heavier looking war machines but still retain the usefulness of low end units. Thoughts?