|
On July 08 2004 07:11 HnR)Louder wrote:
i use scouts to counter carriers in pvp =\ i also use them to counter bc if that situation ever arises - that's really what they're for anyway, to counter the big ships. they should start w/ bigger sight and maybe speed upgrade should be cheapened a bit.
...snip....
I play a lot of 2v2 and if you are toss/ran vs toss/ran, toss/toss or ran/ran carrier and in the latter battlecruisers actually become heavily used units in endgame situations. I've tried scouts as a counter and I've really tested them thoroughly, but honestly, they suck incredibly vs opponents that know what they are doing.
1. You need to support them with shuttled templar and get off a healthy amount of storm, otherwise they are not cost efficient, it's as simple as that.
2. Really good opponents will dodge storm and yamato/sniper your shuttle.
3. If opponents scout your scouts counter, they can counter with additional cors/valks, completely obsoleting your scouts fleet. If your opponent builds 6 cors and 2 carrier and you build 8 scouts, corsair and scouts negate each other or better, you have to hide your scouts and he can't attack ground with corsairs. Your opponent still has 2 carrier for free. Plus Dweb is ok costwise, if you got fleet beacon and cors anyways.
To sum all this up: Why would you build scouts, when the same ressources invested into a cors/carrier combo would be superior in every single point? Allthemore as you can't spare the fleet beacon if you want scout speed upgrade ....
|
Soooo, about queens. Queens ARE incredible efficient from the theorycraft point of view, with both ensnare and broodling. In real game situations they aren't used very often, because of the second law of thermodynamics:
http://www.secondlaw.com/two.html
The queens entropy term (the amount of order required) sucks incredibly. You have to decide long in advance
1. the exact number of queens,
2. the exact build time. Build time + energy build up time amount to an uberlong overall effective build time before use for queens. Time equals Money.
Everyone using queens is trying to do the job of a Maxwell's demon and we all know that Maxwell's demons are notorious underperformers ;-)
|
I agree with Stimey and Klogon when they point out that the people who think that the game is 100% balanced right now and needs no changes are the same ones who said that the game was balanced and needed no changes every single patch.
Want an example? Okay, lets say for example that the Dark Archon's maelstrom uses 75 energy instead of 100 in this current patch, and then I make a post saying, hey, I suggest that in the next balance patch, maelstrom should take 100 energy to cast.
Then all of those SAME people would be the ones saying saying oh stfu. 75 energy is perfect. The game is balanced right now. We don't need changes.
...you get where I'm going at?
|
god not another one of these threads im not even gonna bother reading past the first page. Starcraft is good as is.
|
Stop comparing game balance with racial/unit balances.
I can make a game where both players can make ultralisks for 100 minerals, and zealots for 100 minerals.
Would the game be balanced? Hell yes. Each player still has 50% chance of winning. People would just keep on making ultralisks all the time and you'll never see zealots made in games.
What if zealots are then made stronger so people will have to think to decide whether to make zealots + ultras, pure zealots, or pure ultras? That's what I call balance.
That's the case with Starcraft. People who think that it is all balanced and needs no changes need to seriously go back and rethink.
|
On July 08 2004 06:56 FrozenArbiter wrote: Show nested quote +On July 08 2004 02:30 WtF.Dondy wrote: actually, i like the idea of queens having more initial mana AND lowering the spell to 125. this would make queens be usefull alot earlier than around the seventh minute, at least that's when i have them with 150 mana. also browsing the blizzard page (and reading a thread at starcraftgamers) i realized that ensnare actually doesn't help as much as i tought before as it doesn't lower the cooldown rate? i'm a z player so i might be subjective in the matter of queens (and yes, i tried to use them fairly often but with the high cost of the spells like broodling and the low upcoming it's very very hard. also it requires insane micro imho). the infested cc and the infested terran are only a goodie for the zerg, nothing really serious imho. it would be nice tough to see queens used EFFECTIVELY, rep anyone? i've already seen reps, tough the queens were only used to show off  valkyres are actually pretty nice already. dark archons are probably underused because of their micro intensenes, together with hts. reducing the cost of maelstorm or improving the duration would make them too usefull imho. possibly lowering the cost of the update would be better. in pvz i find scouts already usefull, at least, i tried them out. a tech build like: gate (2 zeals), core, stargate(2 sairs, 1 scout) -> overlord hunt to dts worked fine for me, the scout really helped too. i don't know about other match ups tough. nukes are just as dark archons, underused because of beeing much too micro intense. i tough don't think there's a really good solution to that. that are just my two bits to that.  How many games did it take you to learn how to effectively use mutalisks/lurkers? How many games have you tried queens out? Now be quiet -_- I have loads of replays where queens are not used as a show off (for example sonic)black vs xellos.. Xellos moves out with marine medic force after 2 rax cc, black ensnares and surrounds and RAPES). 2 sair 1 scout is ridiculous. Too much gas invested in those units! 1 scout instead of 1 sair can be good though.
i have tried queens for 2 weeks, i think that's enough to beeing able to say that they're crap atm  bahbahbah!
he comes in a bit too late tough, the scout, anyways. you have a link to the rep?
|
This would be good changes IMO. If someone (Eniram or whoever) can make a UMS so we can test it out it would be awesome. Alot are copied and pasted from Stimey's post, and then edited to give further balance.
reduce upgrades build time by 32bt
-level 1 = 234 (from 266)
-level 2 = 266 (from 298)
-level 3 = 298 (from 330)
-robotics upgrades - Lower scarabs capacity upgrade from 200/200 to 150/100. Lower shuttle speed down to 150/150. Lower scarab damage upgrade to 175/175.
-energy upgrades - Lower all +50 energy upgrade by 50 minerals.
-ocular implants (ghost sight) - Lower by 50 minerals
-scout upgrades - Sight & speed upgrades should cost nothing to upgrade IMO.
Reduce the time of these upgrades build time down to 100bt (from 120)
-optical flare
-mind control
-emp shockwave
Reduce the time of these upgrades and nuke build time to 80bt (from 100)
-maelstrom
-cloaking field (wraith)
-plague
-stasis
-lockdown
-nuclear missile
Reduce these upgrades and units build time to 70bt (from 80)
-burrow
-restoration
-spawn broodling
-ensnare
-disruption web
-nuclear silo
-personnel cloaking
-hallucination
- Reduce EMP research cost to 175/175 from 200/200
- Reduce Protoss shield upgrade costs down to as much as it costs to upgrade armor.
- Dark Archon's Mind Control energy cost reduced to 135
- Dark Archon's Maelstrom energy cost reduced to 75
- Queen's spawn broodling energy cost reduced to 120
- Queen's ensnare energy cost reduced to 75 [EDIT: 65]
- Scout's air-to-ground attack enhanced by 3 damage per shot
- Infested Terran's hitpoints increased to 85
Mapmakers gogogo!
|
On July 07 2004 15:26 Rt-S.FakeSteve wrote:
Making EVERY unit equally useful would a) imbalance the game and b) take away the awe when someone uses one of these units extremely effectively.
Giyom's scout rape vs XellOs comes to mind.
I can't remember which game it was and I can't remember the zerg, but I've seen a game that came down to the wire and was won by Reach when he mass maelstromed a gigantic zerg army and stormed it all.
The game is balanced right now. Changing it would f*** up the game. Plus it wouldn't be nearly as much fun with EVERY unit being equally useful.
Actually, I think making these rare units more useful can make the game MORE fun. I won't go into each rare unit's details and suggested modifications, but having more options (viable options, that is) will not only make you think, but also make your opponent more tense! It is true that high templar is favoured over dark archons for spellcaster unit choice.
I find that people who play money maps are not truly aware of the all important cost-efficiency issue simply because...it's not an issue! StarCraft is best played when economy management is involved. As an example, the High Templar vs. the Dark Archon. It's 50/150 for the HT, and 250/200 for the DA. 200/200 for both mind control and psionic storm upgrades. I rather have the HT or the two original Dark Templars because if my opponent rushes me at the earliest he can, I'll still be waiting for the DA to amass 150 mana, 75 more precious mana-time than the HT's psionic storm. Not to mention the additional 20 build time needed for the two DTs to meld. And the earliest rushes are of course, basic units like marines and zerglings. Like the DA's mind controlling one of them would really save you.
So efficiency not only involves cost, but also the timing.
I would love to see another balance patch that will make these rarely used units become more viable. It'll really make strategies and counters more interesting. Imagine a boxer (ha ha, no pun intended), relying primarily on the uppercut. Well, the opponent only has to watch out for the uppercut. But there are more weapons available, like jabs, straights, corkscrews, and dragon punches. It'll be a more interesting fight, with the opponent needing more alertness. The same benefit applies to the opponent if he has more viable weapons to employ.
I really feel this desire for making the rare units more useful isn't as strong with money map players because all the aspects such as economy supervision, expansion decisions, and defending against the early rush are virtually non-existent. These are the factors that make StarCraft such a brilliant strategy game!
Yes, it's true that it's really amazing when someone used a rare unit so ingeniously. An example is when Vince Carter dunked OVER a 7'2" French player. It stands out because it's so unusual. But I rather have a hundred more interesting SC games than a single special one.
I like it when Protoss can go with Reaver or High Templar tech. Both are feasible. Imagine if one of them is more expensive? Most will go with the more cost-efficient. And this is the underlying problem with rarely used units. For the cost and time, they aren't useful.
And this problem is difficult to realize for money map players. So I'm tempted to suspect that those shooting down tfeign are probably money map EXPERTS.
Prose
|
terran lift off and bunkers allows them to cheese like no other race, they are unbalanced
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 12:11 tfeign wrote:
Stop comparing game balance with racial/unit balances.
I can make a game where both players can make ultralisks for 100 minerals, and zealots for 100 minerals.
Would the game be balanced? Hell yes. Each player still has 50% chance of winning. People would just keep on making ultralisks all the time and you'll never see zealots made in games.
What if zealots are then made stronger so people will have to think to decide whether to make zealots + ultras, pure zealots, or pure ultras? That's what I call balance.
That's the case with Starcraft. People who think that it is all balanced and needs no changes need to seriously go back and rethink.
..--
All units are not supposed to see equal play time......
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 12:49 WtF.Dondy wrote: Show nested quote +On July 08 2004 06:56 FrozenArbiter wrote: On July 08 2004 02:30 WtF.Dondy wrote: actually, i like the idea of queens having more initial mana AND lowering the spell to 125. this would make queens be usefull alot earlier than around the seventh minute, at least that's when i have them with 150 mana. also browsing the blizzard page (and reading a thread at starcraftgamers) i realized that ensnare actually doesn't help as much as i tought before as it doesn't lower the cooldown rate? i'm a z player so i might be subjective in the matter of queens (and yes, i tried to use them fairly often but with the high cost of the spells like broodling and the low upcoming it's very very hard. also it requires insane micro imho). the infested cc and the infested terran are only a goodie for the zerg, nothing really serious imho. it would be nice tough to see queens used EFFECTIVELY, rep anyone? i've already seen reps, tough the queens were only used to show off valkyres are actually pretty nice already. dark archons are probably underused because of their micro intensenes, together with hts. reducing the cost of maelstorm or improving the duration would make them too usefull imho. possibly lowering the cost of the update would be better. in pvz i find scouts already usefull, at least, i tried them out. a tech build like: gate (2 zeals), core, stargate(2 sairs, 1 scout) -> overlord hunt to dts worked fine for me, the scout really helped too. i don't know about other match ups tough. nukes are just as dark archons, underused because of beeing much too micro intense. i tough don't think there's a really good solution to that. that are just my two bits to that. How many games did it take you to learn how to effectively use mutalisks/lurkers? How many games have you tried queens out? Now be quiet -_- I have loads of replays where queens are not used as a show off (for example sonic)black vs xellos.. Xellos moves out with marine medic force after 2 rax cc, black ensnares and surrounds and RAPES). 2 sair 1 scout is ridiculous. Too much gas invested in those units! 1 scout instead of 1 sair can be good though. i have tried queens for 2 weeks, i think that's enough to beeing able to say that they're crap atm bahbahbah! he comes in a bit too late tough, the scout, anyways. you have a link to the rep?
Nah scout doesn't come too late, search for Enough vs intotherain.
Btw, 2 weeks compared to how much time you've spent on your zerg in general is nothing Drone, Sonic)Black, )is(city all use it to great effect ;D
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 14:29 Prose wrote: Show nested quote +On July 07 2004 15:26 Rt-S.FakeSteve wrote:
Making EVERY unit equally useful would a) imbalance the game and b) take away the awe when someone uses one of these units extremely effectively.
Giyom's scout rape vs XellOs comes to mind.
I can't remember which game it was and I can't remember the zerg, but I've seen a game that came down to the wire and was won by Reach when he mass maelstromed a gigantic zerg army and stormed it all.
The game is balanced right now. Changing it would f*** up the game. Plus it wouldn't be nearly as much fun with EVERY unit being equally useful. Actually, I think making these rare units more useful can make the game MORE fun. I won't go into each rare unit's details and suggested modifications, but having more options (viable options, that is) will not only make you think, but also make your opponent more tense! It is true that high templar is favoured over dark archons for spellcaster unit choice. I find that people who play money maps are not truly aware of the all important cost-efficiency issue simply because...it's not an issue! StarCraft is best played when economy management is involved. As an example, the High Templar vs. the Dark Archon. It's 50/150 for the HT, and 250/200 for the DA. 200/200 for both mind control and psionic storm upgrades. I rather have the HT or the two original Dark Templars because if my opponent rushes me at the earliest he can, I'll still be waiting for the DA to amass 150 mana, 75 more precious mana-time than the HT's psionic storm. Not to mention the additional 20 build time needed for the two DTs to meld. And the earliest rushes are of course, basic units like marines and zerglings. Like the DA's mind controlling one of them would really save you. So efficiency not only involves cost, but also the timing. I would love to see another balance patch that will make these rarely used units become more viable. It'll really make strategies and counters more interesting. Imagine a boxer (ha ha, no pun intended), relying primarily on the uppercut. Well, the opponent only has to watch out for the uppercut. But there are more weapons available, like jabs, straights, corkscrews, and dragon punches. It'll be a more interesting fight, with the opponent needing more alertness. The same benefit applies to the opponent if he has more viable weapons to employ. I really feel this desire for making the rare units more useful isn't as strong with money map players because all the aspects such as economy supervision, expansion decisions, and defending against the early rush are virtually non-existent. These are the factors that make StarCraft such a brilliant strategy game! Yes, it's true that it's really amazing when someone used a rare unit so ingeniously. An example is when Vince Carter dunked OVER a 7'2" French player. It stands out because it's so unusual. But I rather have a hundred more interesting SC games than a single special one. I like it when Protoss can go with Reaver or High Templar tech. Both are feasible. Imagine if one of them is more expensive? Most will go with the more cost-efficient. And this is the underlying problem with rarely used units. For the cost and time, they aren't useful. And this problem is difficult to realize for money map players. So I'm tempted to suspect that those shooting down tfeign are probably money map EXPERTS. Prose
God.. Do you know what site you are on :[?
This is the, most likely, biggest site for progaming news in english. The amount of money mappers on this page is minimal! I haven't played money maps since I started in 2001, I and many others on this forum are all going to wcg.
Scores of top players post on this page, this is not some east clan's page :/
Go play war 3 if you want all units to see the same amount of game time...-- Dark archon = Support unit.
Why would you even CONSIDER upgrading mind control to stop an early rush, EVER?
|
|
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 12:49 tfeign wrote:
This would be good changes IMO. If someone (Eniram or whoever) can make a UMS so we can test it out it would be awesome. Alot are copied and pasted from Stimey's post, and then edited to give further balance.
reduce upgrades by 32bt
-level 1 = 234 (from 266)
-level 2 = 266 (from 298)
-level 3 = 298 (from 330)
-robotics upgrades - Lower scarabs capacity upgrade from 200/200 to 150/100
-energy upgrades - Lower all +50 energy upgrade by 50 minerals.
-ocular implants (ghost sight) - Lower by 50 minerals
-scout upgrades - Sight & speed upgrades should cost nothing to upgrade IMO.
Reduce the time of these upgrades build time down to 100bt (from 120)
-optical flare
-mind control
-emp shockwave
Hm.. Might be worthy of consideration..
Reduce the time of these upgrades and nuke build time to 80bt (from 100)
-maelstrom
-cloaking field (wraith)
-plague
-stasis
-lockdown
-nuclear missile
Reduce these upgrades and units build time to 70bt (from 80)
-burrow
-restoration
-spawn broodling
-ensnare
-disruption web
-nuclear silo
-personnel cloaking
-hallucination
..Those are already fine ffs..
- Reduce EMP research cost to 175/175 from 200/200
- Reduce Protoss shield upgrade costs down to as much as it costs to upgrade armor.
- Dark Archon's Mind Control energy cost reduced to 135
- Dark Archon's Maelstrom energy cost reduced to 75
- Queen's spawn broodling energy cost reduced to 120
- Queen's ensnare energy cost reduced to 75
- Scout's air-to-ground attack enhanced by 3 damage per shot
- Infested Terran's hitpoints increased to 85
Mapmakers gogogo!
You just lost all your right to comment on anything regarding queens: ensnare is already 75 :[
|
FrozenArbiter to answer your question regarding dark archons, that's because dark archons suck against early rushes. Actually, dark archons suck period. You won't see dark archons anywhere in real games because going dark archons is not a viable strategy except in extreme circumstances that would happen like 1 out of 500 games.
So again, why would you rather see high templars being chosen over dark archons 99.9% of the time? Doesn't balance mean that high templar and dark archon are chosen as close to 50% as possible? Realistically they will not be chosen 50% of the time, but who likes to see high templars over dark archons 99.9% of the time? The same thing goes with queens & defilers, scouts & corsairs too.
Oh and the queen's ensnare is a typo. 50 energy is what I originally intended it to be (first post I made). Although it's understandable for it to be around 60~70 energy.
|
I wonder does tfeign realise that nothing is gonna change?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 15:05 tfeign wrote:
FrozenArbiter to answer your question regarding dark archons, that's because dark archons suck against early rushes. Actually, dark archons suck period. You won't see dark archons anywhere in real games because going dark archons is not a viable strategy except in extreme circumstances that would happen like 1 out of 500 games.
So again, why would you rather see high templars being chosen over dark archons 99.9% of the time? Doesn't balance mean that high templar and dark archon are chosen as close to 50% as possible? Realistically they will not be chosen 50% of the time, but who likes to see high templars over dark archons 99.9% of the time? It's not too hard to understand why dark archons must be buffed.
Oh and the queen's ensnare is a typo. 50 energy is what I originally intended it to be (first post I made). Although it's understandable for it to be around 60~70 energy
MIND CONTROL
VS
RUSH
IS
FUCKING DAFT UNLESS IT COSTS 5 MANA
What do you NOT understand about 'supporting unit'?
InToTheRain has been using dark archons to GREAT effect. Garimto has used them. Nal_Ra has used them. Reach has used them.
Vs Zerg you'll always need to choose high templars over Dark archons simply because you need storm unless reavers. Dark archons can be used as it is now, you just need to adapt your builds - which most people derived from replays ; (
ASDFASDFASDFASDFASD
Queen 50 energy for ensnare? YOu are fucking off your rocker =[
. . . . Cliffs and obstructing terrain will mean terran and toss will NEVER, EVER be anything but ensnared.. Jesus christ :/
|
Currently, in 1.11, Ensnare costs 100 mana, Broodling 150 mana, and Parasite 75 mana. Some people need to keep their facts straight when arguing points.
|
100 is way too much. Originally I thought that 50 is a good number but I've already upped it to 65.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On July 08 2004 15:21 Shaz wrote:
Currently, in 1.11, Ensnare costs 100 mana, Broodling 150 mana, and Parasite 75 mana. Some people need to keep their facts straight when arguing points.
Funny.. My map editor says 75 : )
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
