Let's start off by saying that I understand that the balance behind Starcraft, particularly its pro scene, is extremely delicate. Fixing or altering things inside the game can have massive changes on the competitive aspect. This thread is aimed at addressing the future of Starcraft and focusing on preventing the game for turning stale, while maintaining that we keep the game as balanced as possible.
Now how about we take a look at the least commonly used units used for each race: The scout, ghost + nukes, and queens + infested terrans. How can we make this unit viable without upsetting the natural balance of the game?
Taking a look at the scout, we can clearly see we have an ineffective unit that is overshadowed by its superior air friends the corsair and the carrier. How can we give the scout a purpose without overlapping roles between these 2 other units? Well firstly we can see that the unit is too expensive. 275 for minerals and 125 for gas. Lowering these amounts should be the first order of business. Also we have 2 useless upgrades, one for speed and one for vision, that no one would ever care to research. These upgrades should come by default with the unit.
Now the issue persists however: the unit doesn't really have a clearly defined useful role. Originally the scout was designed to battle capital ships. Well battlecruisers arent built in PvT. Carriers havent been popular in PvP in ages and devourers are basically only seen late game on island maps. Lets put attack roles aside and turn to support roles. Maybe an ability could be used to create a useful strategy for the scout? What if we gave stargate tech an option for detection? How could we do this without stepping on the lonely observer's toes?
My idea is to the give the scout a detection ability that uses energy similar to how the ghost and the wraith use energy. 25 to enable and its drains to 0. Now we have a dedicated detection role (the observer) and a support detection role with worse detecting abilities but more robust and it can attack. Some might say stats buffs such as decreased cost and built in upgrades plus added detection might be too much. There is certainly an argument there but I believe the scout is such a poorly designed unit that it truly needs that much help.
Moving on to the nukes, we have a tech path that suffers from one fatal flaw. Its just way too damn costly. Honestly I feel like ghosts are actually a well designed unit in the sense that it could essentially be used in all 3 match ups. 25 minerals and 75 gas is a fair cost for the actual unit in this regard. Then you have to research cloak. Then you have to get the nuclear silo add on. Now its time to finally build your nuke. Wait I forgot the covert ops. So much investment that its almost impossible to get your money's worth.
Reduce nuclear silo from 100/100 to 50/50. Reduce nuclear missile cost from 200/200 to 100/100. 8 supply is absolutely ridiculous. Could argue anywhere from 4 to 6 supply as a fair range. To make this unit viable you might have to go as far as giving the cloak by default. It's just such a huge commitment to go down this tech path that making it worthwhile takes quite a bit.
Finally we have the queen which actually scares me to talk about changing because this unit does see competitive play. Spawn broodling against a meching terran is certainly a fair strategy that's seen from time to time. Any changes to this unit would have to be subtle. What's underused about queens? Well ensare never really pays off. It takes too much apm that is usually better spent somewhere else. Infested terrans are even more rare to see.
Perhaps an energy reduction from 75 to 50 on ensare could increase its usage overall. If this proves to be too powerful of a buff then perhaps increasing the range of the ability would be more subtle? I would also consider both of these changes to the parasite ability too.
Situations where infested terrans arise are so rare that judging what to change becomes difficult. Id start with reducing the cost from 100/50 to 50/50. Next I would give them some sort of melee attack similar to how kerrigan attacks in the campaign. The suicide ability would have to be manually triggered so you have control of when it is used.
Im not a game designer nor am I an expert in the matter. I am however very passionate about this game. Starcraft is my baby that I will love forever and I want its legacy to live on until Im an old man with arthritis who can barely get above 50 apm. I want to hear opinions from everyone. If changing units in broodwar (even the mediocre ones) seems like a terrible idea to you, I want you to tell me. Should things like scouts and nukes live on as bad mannered novelty units or should we try to figure out a way to implement them into the game?
Poll: Should we consider fixing starcraft's unused units?
No, leave the game as it is. (170)
73%
Yes (64)
27%
234 total votes
Your vote: Should we consider fixing starcraft's unused units?
looks like this is a yearly returning topic? i think the community is pretty much done with these when i read trough this topic i get the feeling oh here we go again....
On March 19 2019 14:57 kidcrash wrote: This thread is aimed at addressing the future of Starcraft and focusing on preventing the game for turning stale, while maintaining that we keep the game as balanced as possible.
Use exotic maps with new design aspects. If it's shit, stop using it. Case closed, the game won't be stale in any way.
On March 19 2019 15:08 onlystar wrote: looks like this is a yearly returning topic? i think the community is pretty much done with these when i read trough this topic i get the feeling oh here we go again....
I respect your opinion to disagree. I apologize that i havent read through other posters threads on the matter. Id like my right to discuss the topic to remain somewhat constructive.
On March 19 2019 14:57 kidcrash wrote: This thread is aimed at addressing the future of Starcraft and focusing on preventing the game for turning stale, while maintaining that we keep the game as balanced as possible.
Use exotic maps with new design aspects. If it's shit, stop using it. Case closed, the game won't be stale in any way.
Exotic maps are certainly an effective way of keeping the game fresh. I feel like ignoring units that are in the game and are seldom (never) used is a bit stubborn however.
On March 19 2019 15:08 onlystar wrote: looks like this is a yearly returning topic? i think the community is pretty much done with these when i read trough this topic i get the feeling oh here we go again....
Yearly? 3 times a year at least. The fact that they are underused makes it more interesting when they are used.
On March 19 2019 15:08 onlystar wrote: looks like this is a yearly returning topic? i think the community is pretty much done with these when i read trough this topic i get the feeling oh here we go again....
Yearly? 3 times a year at least. The fact that they are underused makes it more interesting when they are used.
agree let me sum it up for topic starter : previous topics conclude all these units have their niche when they CAN be used in some strategies&maps and some with an element of surprise to catch players off guards its a wonderful mechanic to see these niche strategies being put to use sometimes its perfect the way it is.
also queen ensnare/parasite/broodling is not so rare in tvz /tvz mech late game
I think my argument would be that everything about starcraft is wonderful and beautiful for me and that not tapping into its full potential is a waste. Is seeing nada nuke someone in an asl match any more or less "interesting" than watching standard 20 minute tvp battles in the asl finals?
Edit: i guess entertainment is subjective in this regard
this forum is pretty dead anyway, doesnt matter if this thread pop up from time to time.
queen ensnare not being used isnt really about apm, its just the fact that the ensnare aoe is too small to make it worth it.only way to catch a good chunk of MM is if they are packed together in one spot which rarely happens in a high level game with players proactively moving stuff.
and even if you catch them, you have to take advantage of it ASAP as the ensnare will run out soon. you can ensnare stacked wraiths but by the time you get queen and ensnare in a typical game where this happen, the momentum wuld have shift to zerg aggression/terran defense and the terrans will park their wraiths over turret and marines
Nukes are nigh orgasmic because you so seldom get to see them. The same applies to queens and scouts. It does not seem so that all units have to be as mundane as zerglings for the game's full beauty to come to surface.
Talking about changes to infested terran costs/behavior is silly IMO. I mean it only applies in one matchup, and the game is typically decided at the point one can be built. I'm not in favor of changing them at all, but frankly, I'd just as soon see them eliminated than get concerned about changing their stats.
Scouts.. your proposed changes are interesting, but only because of the unit name. I'm not in favor of changing them, but if you are going to make it useful as a scout (faster, greater vision, detection spell) then it shouldn't be able to deliver extreme air damage.
queens and nukes... certainly don't change these. we've already witnessed an interesting (possibly short lived) rush to nuke meta. It wouldn't surprise me if either or both of these are underused in error as is. ie, worth using more often real games. i've seen a few of ZvT with queens that were fantastic. also a queen or two in ZvZ can almost cause an instant win in the right circumstance.
I would love to see more DA for protoss against zerg. I think it is the most underused unit in BW, actually. Looking at the potential this unit has, especially in mid and late game scenarios. But it is a matter of build order and creativity and not balance per se.
The only change to ghosts/nuke which i would add is changing lockdown to work on bio units and changing splash damage for nuke zones, so that it works on burrowed units under swarm same as unburrowed. Now to kill lurker you have to put a nuke directly in its ass, which is ridiculous, when nukes could be used to move forward against zerg defending with swarm. Lockdown on bio would make sk terran more interesting and easier to play against hard countering mass ultra. Thats all changes I would like to see, basically directing tvz.
Even with the both upgrades (which I research, sorry, both of them when I'm using scouts) and 3/3/3, the only viable usage is with shield batteries (like 8-10) and speed upgrade at least. Even so, marines with stim or hydras absolutely destroys them with a fraction of cost. If we introduce also medics or defilers, the thing become ridiculous.
Even using like 8-10 for raids, they have troubles even with 2 spores or turrets (they handle better the cannons).
The main issue with scouts is not the price (albeit *very* costly for a harass unit), but their speed. Corsairs are better, even being air only, because of their speed. Make the corsair crawl like a scout and 3-4 hydras will clear them out instantly.
The only usage I found are on *some* islands or very large maps, with 10-12 shield batteries and at least 36 scouts (which is a good indication of playing against AI or rookies). Go straight into production, destroy factories/barracks, then fly back to recharge. Other than that, they are nothing more than a pretext of seeing other rare units like queens or ghosts, which demolish them with ensnere or lockdown.
Infested terrans are a great unit, just not that great against terrans and their instant range damage. Queens are fine, ensnare too. M&Ms with 50% damage reduction is a thing and nobody would call you out for cheesing if you use it. Ghosts are tricky, APM intense and cost alot of gas. If their lockdown would have a greater range, they would probably be too strong against toss. Nukes aren't bad either. They just take up the spot of a possible scanner. Scouts are just bad, but they too can have their use... building them is kinda like taunting in Street Fighter. And sometimes, when they are totally unexpected they can deal some damage in the early PvT.
PS: Who cares if this discussion comes up every month on every BW related forum.
One change I’ve always wanted to see is moving D Web research from the fleet beacon to the cybernetics core (I.e. you could research it at the same point as goon range). I think it could open things up a lot in PvZ (especially given cair openings are standard) and also shake TvP up a bit.
Scouts are a terrible unit, however they have their perfect space in pub games. So do ghost/nukes. Queens are underused though. I would like to see more of the broodling features, however it just costs way too much energy to get there. Verdict: leave it where it is. Play games for fun and use those units.
On March 19 2019 20:14 fLyiNgDroNe wrote: Scouts are a terrible unit, however they have their perfect space in pub games. So do ghost/nukes. Queens are underused though. I would like to see more of the broodling features, however it just costs way too much energy to get there. Verdict: leave it where it is. Play games for fun and use those units.
On March 19 2019 18:17 M3t4PhYzX wrote: I would love to see more DA for protoss against zerg. I think it is the most underused unit in BW, actually. Looking at the potential this unit has, especially in mid and late game scenarios. But it is a matter of build order and creativity and not balance per se.
DAs are used more often now then they have ever been in the matchup.
On March 19 2019 18:17 M3t4PhYzX wrote: I would love to see more DA for protoss against zerg. I think it is the most underused unit in BW, actually. Looking at the potential this unit has, especially in mid and late game scenarios. But it is a matter of build order and creativity and not balance per se.
DAs are used more often now then they have ever been in the matchup.
With the half priced DA trick, we could possibly see them even more too.
Dark Archon - should start with 75 energy so it can be more reactionary useful, its spells are actually powerful enough imo
Scout - this unit is dogshit, but give it a detection upgrade in the cybernetic and will also be used as a reactionary in some situations, it will never substitute the observer but it will allow protoss to delay expensive observer tech when he needs the early resources for other units
Scout2 - If the scouts start with both upgrades or at least the speed one already researched, then I think it will be used in some early starts both vs terran and zerg, it kills overlords way faster than corsairs and if it can dances with the scourges and also kill some drones or scvs it will be used imo
Terran:
Ghost - As someone said, it should start with the invis upgrade or at least the nuke range upgrade, anything that will speed up the process. The nukes are too slow imo, they are also expensive, but for what they do, they should be expensive, but it takes forever to get them online and ready with everything necessary for them to work. Maybe the nuke addon should also build faster
Zerg:
Queen: Should start with 75 energy, this unit also needs to be faster reactionary unit. Otherwise its spells are all right imo
Infested Terran: This might be a bit too much and will also buff the queen usage, but queen should be able to infest both terran barracks and protoss gateways to produce it. However, the protoss getaway could not be moved around the map like the terran buildings
On March 19 2019 18:17 M3t4PhYzX wrote: I would love to see more DA for protoss against zerg. I think it is the most underused unit in BW, actually. Looking at the potential this unit has, especially in mid and late game scenarios. But it is a matter of build order and creativity and not balance per se.
DAs are used more often now then they have ever been in the matchup.
True, true. And I love that. But it should be used even more, imo. Also - maybe DA's in shuttles vs Vessels would be a good idea? I think I've seen this play in BeSt vs Mong @ Whiteout or some other PvT of BeSt.. That actually worked amazingly well for him, so I would love to see it being tried more.
Queens aren't even underused anymore. They haven't been since like 2010. Ghosts are rare, but they are useful against carriers, not because you're going to get sick SlayerS`BoxeR 12 carrier lockdown splits of doom, but because you'll snipe one carrier here and there. It's an instant kill. They're good enough. If you want to use them, you can, at the highest level. There are also maps that let you nuke an enemey expansion from safety, like Match Point. Don't buff ghosts. Don't buff Terran.
Nukes outside of those maps are rare, but there are legitimate nuke rush strategies vs Zerg, especially on maps with free inside expansions. NaDa almost made it work against Larva in ASL. With better micro, it really could have worked, and he would have won. I also used to have a nuke rush counter vs fast DT builds. If I had started going for a dropship build and I got DT rushed, I'd reactively drop a medic, vulture, and ghost, and bring along a vessel. I blinded the observer, used EMP on the nexus, laid some mines, and nuked the nexus. I always won with it, 100% of the time (because I only did it reactively vs DT rushes when I had already started going for a dropship build).
The only balance changes I'm open minded to is making maelstrom last slightly longer, and making mind control cheaper to research, although dark archons are already useful in every match up as it is, but that's because of feedback.
Hi, i'm a game designer and I love SC. Those are my suggestions:
- Scouts: i don't like the idea to make them a detector, this role is already of the observer. Also, this would destroy the balance of the game. Anyway, i think it could have a role as a "scout" in pvz. Note that pvz is commonly considered slightly z favored, so it could be a good idea. The idea is to promote the scout to be build as the first air unit, instead of the first corsair. For that to be viablewe need: 1)45 production time (from 50) 2) both upgrades are baseline In this way the scout moves as fast as a corsair and scout even better (10 vision vs 9 vision). In addition, the scout is FAR better killing overlords, and can also harrass drones. As a protoss, it could be convenient to open with 1 scout, and then mass sairs if you want. Note that those buffs don't make scouts viable in pvt or pvp anyway, but only in pvz.
- Ghosts: I find the only possible way to buff it is to give it a very small buff, like Ocular Implants baseline, otherwise they can divent too strong (for the same reason i won't touch the nuke).
- Queen: already in the meta, (even esnare and parasite are used), don't touch it.
- Infested Terran: maybe a faster production time, like 15 instead of 25, could help to spam a lot of them.
do not buff ensnare. It's a fantastic ability as it is. People not using it is on them, not on the queen. (That goes for all things queen. Parasite it amazing, period. Parasite zvp is the most underused ability in the game. Broodling is occasionally great. Ensnare is all around really good both zvt and zvp. Well it's even better zvz but there you can't afford them. )
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
infested terrans however do suck, and I say that as a person who has built them in literally hundreds of games. You could change their cost, even making them completely free provided you have infested a command center, and it wouldn't make any impactful difference. Like I think if you take every game where I have built infested terrans, and the infested terrans I built had costed 0/0 in all of those games, I'm not sure it would have changed the outcome even once. (mostly because I'm already winning when I build infested terrans, but the main issue is that they usually just don't connect. )
And I wouldn't mind decreasing nuke supply cost to 4 and cost of the nuke itself to 100-100.
On March 20 2019 02:09 Liquid`Drone wrote: do not buff ensnare. It's a fantastic ability as it is. People not using it is on them, not on the queen. (That goes for all things queen. Parasite it amazing, period. Parasite zvp is the most underused ability in the game. Broodling is occasionally great. Ensnare is all around really good both zvt and zvp. Well it's even better zvz but there you can't afford them. )
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
infested terrans however do suck, and I say that as a person who has built them in literally hundreds of games. You could change their cost, even making them completely free provided you have infested a command center, and it wouldn't make any impactful difference. Like I think if you take every game where I have built infested terrans, and the infested terrans I built had costed 0/0 in all of those games, I'm not sure it would have changed the outcome even once. (mostly because I'm already winning when I build infested terrans, but the main issue is that they usually just don't connect. )
And I wouldn't mind decreasing nuke supply cost to 4 and cost of the nuke itself to 100-100.
So basically don't change anything.
So what you really mean is infested terran should have +10 armor
Sorry OP, you dont understand the community. There are players who have literally said, and argued, and I genuinely think honestly believe, that starcraft is flawless. And theres a whole continuum of this, people who might not think broodwar is literally flawless, but its virtually flawless and ANY change is an unacceptable risk. Hell, you want to patch out a literal glitch? How dare you sir, dont you know broodwar is the greatest rts ever CONCEIVED????
So no. No matter the case, how rational, how conservative, however well thought out-- this is not a gaming community. This is a church, and you are in a cult. Repeat after me. Broodwar is perfect we can not patch it! Broodwar is perfect we CAN NOT PATCH IT!
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
Humans split the atom, but fuck, balancing the scout? Give us another millenia of development, and then maybe we will be ready for such a herculean task.
On March 20 2019 02:25 Dazed. wrote: Sorry OP, you dont understand the community. There are players who have literally said, and argued, and I genuinely think honestly believe, that starcraft is flawless. And theres a whole continuum of this, people who might not think broodwar is literally flawless, but its virtually flawless and ANY change is an unacceptable risk. Hell, you want to patch out a literal glitch? How dare you sir, dont you know broodwar is the greatest rts ever CONCEIVED????
So no. No matter the case, how rational, how conservative, however well thought out-- this is not a gaming community. This is a church, and you are in a cult. Repeat after me. Broodwar is perfect we can not patch it! Broodwar is perfect we CAN NOT PATCH IT!
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
Humans split the atom, but fuck, balancing the scout? Give us another millenia of development, and then maybe we will be ready for such a herculean task.
You're always simplifying reality in a way that makes your opponents look bad. I would make plenty of changes to StarCraft, and I am sure that many other players of the conservative persuasion would fix errors, too, so long as those errors don't improve the game. There are a few of those left. In addition to the changes I listed above, I would fix the error of units getting stuck when attacking moving targets, I would fix the occasional problem of units getting stuck on certain ramps, like the infamous 12 o clock ramp on fighting spirit, and I would add one more bookmark, to the F1 key (controversial, but I would do it)
But on the topic of the scout, people like you want to take away the hype of people winning with scouts. People like me don't want scouts to be used every game, or to be viable in every situation. We want tools that only rarely, through elite skill and creativity, win games. There was a game on Colosseum during the kespa era that was only won due to scouts. The Protoss had gone for a fast expansion and was contained by a 2 facting terran. His solution: scouts. The Protoss was Kal. I don't remember who the Terran was.Anyway, he was not messing around because he had already won. He was in deep trouble, and he won with scouts.
If scouts become a common occurrence, then it won't be as exciting when things like that happen.
On March 20 2019 02:25 Dazed. wrote: Sorry OP, you dont understand the community. There are players who have literally said, and argued, and I genuinely think honestly believe, that starcraft is flawless. And theres a whole continuum of this, people who might not think broodwar is literally flawless, but its virtually flawless and ANY change is an unacceptable risk. Hell, you want to patch out a literal glitch? How dare you sir, dont you know broodwar is the greatest rts ever CONCEIVED????
So no. No matter the case, how rational, how conservative, however well thought out-- this is not a gaming community. This is a church, and you are in a cult. Repeat after me. Broodwar is perfect we can not patch it! Broodwar is perfect we CAN NOT PATCH IT!
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
Humans split the atom, but fuck, balancing the scout? Give us another millenia of development, and then maybe we will be ready for such a herculean task.
I'm not sure if anyone considers Brood War virtually flawless, but at this point if you change anything in BW balance-wise, you make BW not BW. And people like BW.
Don't be silly. There's no conflict between 'isn't perfect' and 'you can't meaningfully change attributes of a single unit without creating unforeseen distortions'.
If you decrease the scout cost by 5 minerals, it won't break the game. It also won't make any meaningful difference. Have scouts start with the speed upgrade? Could have an impact we don't yet understand (1 scout into 3 gate goon was already a fairly powerful pvz cheese on certain maps.) It could spell doom for guardian transitions in zvp - 1 microed speed scout with cannon backing means scourge can't touch it. (whereas currently 1 scout is useless to handle those because it'll just get scourged).
And while I'm not claiming brood war is perfect, I am arguing that the balance is the best out of any video game there is, and I'm arguing that a large part of this stems from the fact that there hasn't been a balance patch for almost 19 years. Making any changes to any unit is either going to be virtually meaningless (in the event where you give a small boost to an obviously underpowered/too expensive unit, making it still underpowered/too expensive, just less so), or potentially meta-breaking (in the event where you give a bigger boost to a similar unit to make it actually viable.)
Perhaps you want to change people's approach to the game. I don't. I think the fact that it's been the same game for 19 years is precisely part of what has made it so damn advanced. The degree of strategic development we see in brood war is only possible in an unchanging game. It does come with the drawback that new strategies virtually never occur, and that new tactical developments need a keenly trained eye to even be noticed, but I don't want to make the trade. It doesn't mean I think 'the game is perfect' or that it's a cult or any of the other ridiculous things you said.
On March 19 2019 21:29 BisuDagger wrote: If SCVs can repair air units then they should have an air attack. Glad I got that off my chest.
Yeah that's always irked me a little, I can only presume that the air units in question fly lower to be repaired even though we don't see it
Also, high templars appear to be a floating unit yet they trigger mines
As for the underused units, I think they should be left exactly as they are, you would probably find that altering them slightly would make them too powerful and ruin balance.
I'm in the leave most of them be category. To get them into even into a niche role means buffing them, which will necessarily screw up balance if it's strong enough to be used.
Infested terran is probably the only one that it almost doesn't matter. Could be free on a 1 minute spawn timer and I doubt you'd see more than a couple times each season, and even more rarely have it decide a game.
Here are bunch of my thoughts: Scouts: I do not consider scout detection ability good idea. Nowadays (this is so funny word in case of BroodWar) you see robo and get to think "observers or reavers?". If scout gets detection , robo would mean reavers 90% of time. So no.
However I would like to see scouts more useful. Not as attacking unit, but as a scouting unit. I could imagine some "temporary parasite" ability, like 15 secs of shared vision of attacked unit (unless burrowed). Or an ability to land and become ground unit until cancelled. Of course with this ability, the air and ground attack points should swap. The time needed for switch should be the same as the time taken for lurkers to burrow.
Infested terran: it is like the zerg nuke, very fast and quite easy to kill. Don't change it. Perhaps more maps with cc to infest
Ghost: The ability of ghost that should be promoted is lockdown. Why is it underused? Too expensive? Perhaps. 75 for lockdown could be an option to investigate. OR, maybe noone cares about ghosts unless going nukes, because they are poor shooters. So an alternative is to increase ghost attack a tiny bit (C'mon if DT has 40 attack and 30 cooldown, ghost could do better than 10/22. 15 perhaps?). This would encourage incorporating more ghosts into army.
Queens: Parasite is great in casual games. Ensnare - less so, but still it is a good ability. The main problem with queens lies in the enormous time needed to get enough energy to broodling tanks. Zerg risks a lot while banking such an energy with control group of queens. This is a supply excluded from game for long. Templars wait 25 energy to get their first chance to storm. Vessels wait 50 energy to get an insta-kill of irradiate. Queen waiting 100 energy to broodling a tank is way too long. There are two possible solutions:
- increase starting queen energy or - lower energy needed to broodling.
Accepting solution 1 requires to alter also other queen abilities costs. If queen starts with (say) 75 energy ensnare is immediate, we have muta-queen micro instead of just muta micro, and terran is in shambles. Just get enough queens. Accepting solution 2 seems reasonable way to shorten queen "recharging time" I personally would like to pay 100E for a broodling. OR 125E if it can broodling a reaver or archon.
There is also an alternative solution to broodling problem - leave it at 150E, but make it range spell (enough to get 2 adjacent tanks).
Now, lets do proper UMSes, practice it for like 5 to 10 years and then decide whether to put it into game. What we know now, the game balance is near perfect. What we don't know, is whether changes would spoil it, or could be incorporated by new meta. So I say, let's try it. If anything we'd have some fun.
On March 20 2019 03:30 Amui wrote: I'm in the leave most of them be category. To get them into even into a niche role means buffing them, which will necessarily screw up balance if it's strong enough to be used.
Infested terran is probably the only one that it almost doesn't matter. Could be free on a 1 minute spawn timer and I doubt you'd see more than a couple times each season, and even more rarely have it decide a game.
Indeed. The game stats are fine as is. I'd rather we didn't risk it with Blizzard's track record. Best thing to do is have more wacky maps that force different strats out much like ASL has been doing. I mean, we even saw bio terran vs protoss in ASL6 and we saw ghosts vs corsairs in ASL4.
On March 20 2019 03:38 shaggles wrote: Here are bunch of my thoughts: Scouts: I do not consider scout detection ability good idea. Nowadays (this is so funny word in case of BroodWar) you see robo and get to think "observers or reavers?". If scout gets detection , robo would mean reavers 90% of time. So no.
However I would like to see scouts more useful. Not as attacking unit, but as a scouting unit. I could imagine some "temporary parasite" ability, like 15 secs of shared vision of attacked unit (unless burrowed). Or an ability to land and become ground unit until cancelled. Of course with this ability, the air and ground attack points should swap. The time needed for switch should be the same as the time taken for lurkers to burrow.
Infested terran: it is like the zerg nuke, very fast and quite easy to kill. Don't change it. Perhaps more maps with cc to infest
Ghost: The ability of ghost that should be promoted is lockdown. Why is it underused? Too expensive? Perhaps. 75 for lockdown could be an option to investigate. OR, maybe noone cares about ghosts unless going nukes, because they are poor shooters. So an alternative is to increase ghost attack a tiny bit (C'mon if DT has 40 attack and 30 cooldown, ghost could do better than 10/22. 15 perhaps?). This would encourage incorporating more ghosts into army.
Queens: Parasite is great in casual games. Ensnare - less so, but still it is a good ability. The main problem with queens lies in the enormous time needed to get enough energy to broodling tanks. Zerg risks a lot while banking such an energy with control group of queens. This is a supply excluded from game for long. Templars wait 25 energy to get their first chance to storm. Vessels wait 50 energy to get an insta-kill of irradiate. Queen waiting 100 energy to broodling a tank is way too long. There are two possible solutions:
- increase starting queen energy or - lower energy needed to broodling.
Accepting solution 1 requires to alter also other queen abilities costs. If queen starts with (say) 75 energy ensnare is immediate, we have muta-queen micro instead of just muta micro, and terran is in shambles. Just get enough queens. Accepting solution 2 seems reasonable way to shorten queen "recharging time" I personally would like to pay 100E for a broodling. OR 125E if it can broodling a reaver or archon.
There is also an alternative solution to broodling problem - leave it at 150E, but make it range spell (enough to get 2 adjacent tanks).
Now, lets do proper UMSes, practice it for like 5 to 10 years and then decide whether to put it into game. What we know now, the game balance is near perfect. What we don't know, is whether changes would spoil it, or could be incorporated by new meta. So I say, let's try it. If anything we'd have some fun.
But people use queens against mech all of the time. It's not even rare.
On March 20 2019 03:38 shaggles wrote: Here are bunch of my thoughts: Scouts: I do not consider scout detection ability good idea. Nowadays (this is so funny word in case of BroodWar) you see robo and get to think "observers or reavers?". If scout gets detection , robo would mean reavers 90% of time. So no.
However I would like to see scouts more useful. Not as attacking unit, but as a scouting unit. I could imagine some "temporary parasite" ability, like 15 secs of shared vision of attacked unit (unless burrowed). Or an ability to land and become ground unit until cancelled. Of course with this ability, the air and ground attack points should swap. The time needed for switch should be the same as the time taken for lurkers to burrow.
Infested terran: it is like the zerg nuke, very fast and quite easy to kill. Don't change it. Perhaps more maps with cc to infest
Ghost: The ability of ghost that should be promoted is lockdown. Why is it underused? Too expensive? Perhaps. 75 for lockdown could be an option to investigate. OR, maybe noone cares about ghosts unless going nukes, because they are poor shooters. So an alternative is to increase ghost attack a tiny bit (C'mon if DT has 40 attack and 30 cooldown, ghost could do better than 10/22. 15 perhaps?). This would encourage incorporating more ghosts into army.
Queens: Parasite is great in casual games. Ensnare - less so, but still it is a good ability. The main problem with queens lies in the enormous time needed to get enough energy to broodling tanks. Zerg risks a lot while banking such an energy with control group of queens. This is a supply excluded from game for long. Templars wait 25 energy to get their first chance to storm. Vessels wait 50 energy to get an insta-kill of irradiate. Queen waiting 100 energy to broodling a tank is way too long. There are two possible solutions:
- increase starting queen energy or - lower energy needed to broodling.
Accepting solution 1 requires to alter also other queen abilities costs. If queen starts with (say) 75 energy ensnare is immediate, we have muta-queen micro instead of just muta micro, and terran is in shambles. Just get enough queens. Accepting solution 2 seems reasonable way to shorten queen "recharging time" I personally would like to pay 100E for a broodling. OR 125E if it can broodling a reaver or archon.
There is also an alternative solution to broodling problem - leave it at 150E, but make it range spell (enough to get 2 adjacent tanks).
Now, lets do proper UMSes, practice it for like 5 to 10 years and then decide whether to put it into game. What we know now, the game balance is near perfect. What we don't know, is whether changes would spoil it, or could be incorporated by new meta. So I say, let's try it. If anything we'd have some fun.
But people use queens against mech all of the time. It's not even rare.
Indeed and we've had the best Terrans such as Flash and Last losing to queens in long drawn out macro games so trying to buff broodling is insanity imo because queens already see just enough use that they don't need a fix.
On March 20 2019 02:25 Dazed. wrote: Sorry OP, you dont understand the community. There are players who have literally said, and argued, and I genuinely think honestly believe, that starcraft is flawless. And theres a whole continuum of this, people who might not think broodwar is literally flawless, but its virtually flawless and ANY change is an unacceptable risk. Hell, you want to patch out a literal glitch? How dare you sir, dont you know broodwar is the greatest rts ever CONCEIVED????
So no. No matter the case, how rational, how conservative, however well thought out-- this is not a gaming community. This is a church, and you are in a cult. Repeat after me. Broodwar is perfect we can not patch it! Broodwar is perfect we CAN NOT PATCH IT!
The scout exists in such a fine tuned balance that any buff that makes it viable would probably make it occasionally OP, so don't touch that either.
Humans split the atom, but fuck, balancing the scout? Give us another millenia of development, and then maybe we will be ready for such a herculean task.
I don't understand why you stick around at this point given the sheer* amount of posts you make that are exactly like this. It's as if that is your main motivator at this point.
Has anyone ever made any UMS maps with small balance changes, and gotten pros to play on them? I don't think there should be any official balance changes, but I admit I'd be curious to see what that would look like.
Scout was used in the map Sparkle was it not? So all it takes is a map that makes it so making a scout can be useful. As it is Scout doesn't see much play because the situations to use them rarely exists. Nukes are are rare, but it isn't something that should be common and doesn't really fulfil a specific design case anyways. Though I agree that 8 supply for a nuke is too much. Ensnare was used a few times in ASL, by some Zerg whose name I have already forgotten. Queens are seen in ZvT anyways if the T goes mech and the game drags on long enough. Infested terrans are rare becuase Infested CC are rare and the T player will probably try to snipe it once it has been infested if he can.. Honestly speaking the one thing that reduces the usage of infested terran is that you will only really ever get one infested CC and it takes so long to build an infested terran that it's not really worth the bother to remember to build one.
In any case, poll question is nonsense and pointless as "we" cannot "fix" starcraft units, and most of your example units are used not "unused".
We have seen ghosts and queens at least see some use. It would be possible to make them easier to integrate into games, but I don't necessarily see it as a good thing. When the game has units like this, any game where they are used is more fun for fans, and is more likely to be shared. You would just sort of be making them like every other unit if you improved them.
Scouts truly don't see use except in the way that building a manner command centre in your opponent's natural is done. They implicitly make certain strategies the opponent will never do unwise. If you make the scout better, though, all you do is make the corsair useless. With wraiths and valkaries, the units are different enough that they kind of have their own niches. With scouts and corsairs it's like... both are good at attacking air, one is cheaper and (I think) builds faster and one has a crappy ground attack.
Adding detection ability to the scout is interesting, I guess, but changes the game completely because now protoss have a choice to skip observer. No more costly robotics facility and observatory and observers that don't do anything and are super weak. Even if the ability costs energy I think protoss would be unlikely to get observers ever again unless they wanted reavers and shuttles. Zerg strategems like shooting down observers to maintain lurker positions fall out the window against the tankier scout. Frankly, any very good reason like detection to get the scout makes the damage output it has feel unreasonable.
I would say if we wanted the scout to have a new role, it would have to be related to the main PvZ problem protoss have, which is dealing with the hydralisk all-in. I elect to give it the ability to land on a photon cannon to make it a super cannon which does the scout's air to air attack, but now to ground units only. Once fused with a photon cannon, it cannot be lifted, but the cannon can putter around as long as it remains in pylon power range.
One thing this thread makes me think of is that we don't really have super-late-game units anymore. There was a time arbiters or defilers or stuff like this would only see play in very drawn out games. Queens are still like that, so are Battle Cruisers and ghosts. I think StarCraft needs units like that. The ghost's tech path is the perfect execution of that. Arbiters are so immediately useful that it's not really weird to rush for them, same with science vessels. Dark Archons see more use in the ultra late game than they do as the maelstrom counter to mutalisks though. It's an interesting aspect of StarCraft that makes ultra late game scenarios interesting, usually because these units are costly, but have very cost efficient abilities or can break stalemates (in the case of Dark Archons, they kind of create the stalemates and even tie-game scenarios). It's easy to forget about those roles when almost all games, particularly in recent years, end long before these scenarios ever occur.
On March 20 2019 05:44 Luddite wrote: Has anyone ever made any UMS maps with small balance changes, and gotten pros to play on them? I don't think there should be any official balance changes, but I admit I'd be curious to see what that would look like.
Flash played on the map where scouts have strong buffs and some other units have little bit adjustments.
I want to see more infested terran but the problem is that it almost die instantly.. the unit is too weak. HP points should be increased to 250 hp and armor increased too. So it could dive into an army without dying instantly. Maybe it could even be increased to 325 hp and worth more supply.. something like 2 or 3. It is too risky to use it right now and the benefits are not high enough
I just want to be able to scout harass the way zerg does with muta and terran does with wraiths. The one and only change i'd make to the game would be to make scout upgrades available via the cybernetics core instead of the fleet beacon. The cost and build time of the scout is fine. It would basically only change the PvZ meta anyways.
On March 20 2019 09:28 EndingLife wrote: I just want to be able to scout harass the way zerg does with muta and terran does with wraiths. The one and only change i'd make to the game would be to make scout upgrades available via the cybernetics core instead of the fleet beacon. The cost and build time of the scout is fine. It would basically only change the PvZ meta anyways.
Giving scouts detection is such a wildly game changing idea. That would completely ruin the PvZ lurker contain/observer snipe situation that we have now. It would also entirely remove the idea of using wraiths to kill carriers.
I'm not going to use this is as a straw man to say all changes would be terrible.. just keep this in mind.
I disagree with the idea of changes to make unused units used. This is a pointless goal. Some units will always be underused. What's more important is the game dynamic - Does brood war generate good games? Yes.
I do not entirely disagree with the idea of changes to shift balance slightly. But it'd have to be with a super light touch. Something like reducing build time on cannons by 3 seconds.
On March 20 2019 05:44 Luddite wrote: Has anyone ever made any UMS maps with small balance changes, and gotten pros to play on them? I don't think there should be any official balance changes, but I admit I'd be curious to see what that would look like.
Thanks, this is just what I was looking for! So from what I can understand (could be wrong): Hydra HP decreased 80->75 photon cannon build time decreased 50->40 corsair build time increased 40->50 scout build time decreased 80->60 scout HP decreased 150->125 scout attack increased 8->10 scout mineral cost decreased 275->225
Overall I tend to agree with drone, buffing the scout like this just makes the corsair obsolete. But it's still cool to see the experiment.
The UMS idea is cool it's always about what is fun at the end of the day.
Btw Ensnare is really good as it is, the skill is terrifying as it cancels stim DPS and make the Marines sitting ducks for Lurkers.
Heh I still remember why I need to practice more before heading into the multiplayer some things on the early game went awful to a point the Protoss I faced killed me with a bunch os Scouts.
The Scout is generally used for BM/crazy play when we see it. I kinda like it that way at the moment. So if we do see it again it will be more special/shocking when it happens.
Stork vs Kolll WCG 2009 game 2 had some good scout usage, compounded by both the skill difference and the map was very suited to scout play due to expo mineral layouts.
On March 20 2019 02:09 Liquid`Drone wrote: infested terrans however do suck
Not against Protoss. I remmember one map that allowed those to be produced and Protoss was absolutely helpless against it. Dark swarm them and than protoss goes into panic mode unless they catch them in storm.
On March 20 2019 02:09 Liquid`Drone wrote: infested terrans however do suck
Not against Protoss. I remmember one map that allowed those to be produced and Protoss was absolutely helpless against it. Dark swarm them and than protoss goes into panic mode unless they catch them in storm.
because they didnt know how to make DA and use maelstrom or even mind control to nullify it even under dark swarm. but don't quote me on it since its just theoretical stuff like almost all the posts in this thread
On March 20 2019 03:30 Amui wrote: I'm in the leave most of them be category. To get them into even into a niche role means buffing them, which will necessarily screw up balance if it's strong enough to be used.
Infested terran is probably the only one that it almost doesn't matter. Could be free on a 1 minute spawn timer and I doubt you'd see more than a couple times each season, and even more rarely have it decide a game.
Indeed. The game stats are fine as is. I'd rather we didn't risk it with Blizzard's track record. Best thing to do is have more wacky maps that force different strats out much like ASL has been doing. I mean, we even saw bio terran vs protoss in ASL6 and we saw ghosts vs corsairs in ASL4.
Can you possibly link that game with Ghosts vs Corsairs you mentioned in ASL 4 ?? Would like to watch that
Agreed with s1 above, move Scout upgrades the Cybernetics Core and maybe decrease cost from 275m to ~250m, I think it would be enough to bring them to the game, nn to removing upgrades imo.
Ghost: give them Lockdown as default and decrease time of Ocular Implants research from 105!! lol to ~60 so make them some useable against Carriers/Arbiters and maybe Shuttles in TvP.
Queen: ez, drecrease cost of Spawn Broodling to 125e and increase Ensnare radius from 4 to 5.
Nuke: remove supply cost completely ( what a strange design, bomb costs supply lol) and decrease Nuclear Silo costs from 100m 100g to 75m 75g
Corsair - increase Disruption Webs duration time from 15secs to 20secs
Dark Archon - Maelstrom is still decent vs Mutas and Ulralisks (look at some games with Best), but Argus Talisman should increase starting energy to 62.
Adding scout movement speed to the cyber core is actually a really good change, nice suggestion. Dweb doesn't need to be buffed, dark archons definitely dont need to be changed. Nothing else really in the game needs to be changed, that's the only change i'd make.
We would need a whole new PTR and thousands upon thousands of games; most of them played by ex-pros and current streamers in order to even start to timidly think about tweaking in-game numbers of spells. This seems hardly likely to happen, doesn't it? So my conclusion would be "Let's just keep it as it is and enjoy it while it lasts; let's drain every drop of joy from this glorious game as a balance change is unreasonable without extensive testing."
Soccer is staling, always the same round ball, always the same 22 humans running back and forth...
Lets not end like sc2 with the devs obsessed to make every single unit usable at any given time. I love to have super rare units/abilities to make an appear even just once a year in the pro scene, it makes for super exciting moments. Look at how we started ASL7, Nada nuke-rushing Larva... yes he lost but who cares (perfect start for a fantastic season btw).
Adding and changing gameplay items is just a trend of a immature western esport driven by a speculative gaming industry that only see esport as a marketing tool or a money machine to milk as many kids as possible.
One day esport will be more about viewers then players so we will start to apreciate a sport for what it is and not for how profitable it is or for how much is going to feed the competitive players hunger of grandiosity by smashing as many noobs as possible in a tranding videogame.
EDIT: Ppl tend to forget that BW is not a native 1v1 game, team games are actually pretty good for many reasons, much better the other rts. All the units mentioned in this topic have a role in team games situations, both a banter and a serious role.
EDIT2:
On March 19 2019 18:17 M3t4PhYzX wrote: I would love to see more DA for protoss against zerg. I think it is the most underused unit in BW, actually. Looking at the potential this unit has, especially in mid and late game scenarios. But it is a matter of build order and creativity and not balance per se.
DA is a trending unit like many others in the pro scene eras. They were quite tranding in pvz around 2006/2007 if I remember correctly.
it's not like the game isn't on the decline anyway i would be all for slight buffs to the scouts and ghost, ideally after blizzard talks to the pros and makes sure the game isn't just ruined for zerg i think the devourer is a little too expensive, island maps shouldn't be the only time they appear (if even that) and it's pretty easy to deal with them with magic. queens on the other hand are totally fine as is
On March 20 2019 19:09 TT1 wrote: Adding scout movement speed to the cyber core is actually a really good change, nice suggestion. Dweb doesn't need to be buffed, dark archons definitely dont need to be changed. Nothing else really in the game needs to be changed, that's the only change i'd make.
interesting idea indeed. Would like to see that implemented, but there's about 0.00001% chance of it happening, so.. yeah.
Took long enough for an answer like antihack's to come along. Always hated the concept of "balance patches" in modern games, because the dev goal is ultimately not to achieve balance but to induce changes in meta to bait players to return periodically to play/watch the game (and in the process give dev money). No more than a marketing ploy
On March 21 2019 00:50 tube wrote: it's not like the game isn't on the decline anyway i would be all for slight buffs to the scouts and ghost, ideally after blizzard talks to the pros and makes sure the game isn't just ruined for zerg i think the devourer is a little too expensive, island maps shouldn't be the only time they appear (if even that) and it's pretty easy to deal with them with magic. queens on the other hand are totally fine as is
The fact that a 21 year old eletronic game is in "decline" is proof that the game is amazing and timeless. Most 21 year old games are simply not played at all.
On March 20 2019 03:30 Amui wrote: I'm in the leave most of them be category. To get them into even into a niche role means buffing them, which will necessarily screw up balance if it's strong enough to be used.
Infested terran is probably the only one that it almost doesn't matter. Could be free on a 1 minute spawn timer and I doubt you'd see more than a couple times each season, and even more rarely have it decide a game.
Indeed. The game stats are fine as is. I'd rather we didn't risk it with Blizzard's track record. Best thing to do is have more wacky maps that force different strats out much like ASL has been doing. I mean, we even saw bio terran vs protoss in ASL6 and we saw ghosts vs corsairs in ASL4.
Can you possibly link that game with Ghosts vs Corsairs you mentioned in ASL 4 ?? Would like to watch that
On March 20 2019 09:28 EndingLife wrote: I just want to be able to scout harass the way zerg does with muta and terran does with wraiths. The one and only change i'd make to the game would be to make scout upgrades available via the cybernetics core instead of the fleet beacon. The cost and build time of the scout is fine. It would basically only change the PvZ meta anyways.
The only change that needs to happen is making hydra upgrades take longer so that PvZ isn't always a toss up of whether or not protoss defends against hydra rushes. It wouldn't affect TvZ or ZvZ at all, so make hydra upgrades take longer.
As far as underutilized units I would make the scout upgrades already part of the unit instead of a separate upgrade. Scouts cost enough as it is, and they may have a place on island maps but I don't think they should be a regular occurrence otherwise in land maps they may change the balance of other match ups.
Corsairs I would make d-web cost 100 energy instead of 125. Squeezing out 2 d-webs per corsair only when they max out energy takes a long time and it only lasts 15 seconds so I'd say its fair especially when it has to be researched and upgraded energy as well. I would like to see more corsair usage in PvT and PvZ. I think it's underutilized when arbiters often disable only 2-3 tanks sometimes if they have a good spread, while corsairs are built cheaper and faster and with a couple d-webs could produce the same results or possibly more.
The seconds it takes for siege tanks to unsiege and move would turn the tide easily, as well as make carrier transitions more common. I think in mid- late game PvZ corsair usage can definitely help against atking bases heavily defended with sunk/lurker spores, reduces surface area for zerg units to atk and make it harder for them to whittle down protoss army making them more survivable for longer. The savings of not having to reproduce units as fast will pay dividends if d-web is utilized to its maximum potential while being used alongside psi-storm. Protoss is the race with the most spell abilities, might as well utilize them to maximize Protoss potential instead of trying to compete in numbers with other races. Trading inefficiently with Terran or Zerg will make Protoss lose.
Theres a 4p Manhattan Project map that used neutral units on the map to encourage these common units. Terran - all naturals have a neutral Nuclear Silo Zerg - CC in middle of map to be infested (like Holy World) Protoss - neutral SCVs (i think) on the map that can be mind controlled
And as always, if you want to try different unit stats, there's MPQ editor for that. You can give ghosts shields, broodlings permanent cloak, and scouts do splash ground damage or whatever you want.
Underused units are interesting because they are underused. If everything was equaly viable, games would be less predictable and just a random shitfest with too much luck.
On March 21 2019 03:15 MooPower92 wrote: The only change that needs to happen is making hydra upgrades take longer so that PvZ isn't always a toss up of whether or not protoss defends against hydra rushes. It wouldn't affect TvZ or ZvZ at all, so make hydra upgrades take longer.
As far as underutilized units I would make the scout upgrades already part of the unit instead of a separate upgrade. Scouts cost enough as it is, and they may have a place on island maps but I don't think they should be a regular occurrence otherwise in land maps they may change the balance of other match ups.
Corsairs I would make d-web cost 100 energy instead of 125. Squeezing out 2 d-webs per corsair only when they max out energy takes a long time and it only lasts 15 seconds so I'd say its fair especially when it has to be researched and upgraded energy as well. I would like to see more corsair usage in PvT and PvZ. I think it's underutilized when arbiters often disable only 2-3 tanks sometimes if they have a good spread, while corsairs are built cheaper and faster and with a couple d-webs could produce the same results or possibly more.
The seconds it takes for siege tanks to unsiege and move would turn the tide easily, as well as make carrier transitions more common. I think in mid- late game PvZ corsair usage can definitely help against atking bases heavily defended with sunk/lurker spores, reduces surface area for zerg units to atk and make it harder for them to whittle down protoss army making them more survivable for longer. The savings of not having to reproduce units as fast will pay dividends if d-web is utilized to its maximum potential while being used alongside psi-storm. Protoss is the race with the most spell abilities, might as well utilize them to maximize Protoss potential instead of trying to compete in numbers with other races. Trading inefficiently with Terran or Zerg will make Protoss lose.
Good points about the hydra and the corsair, actually..
initially was going to post that this is more an issue of aesthetics than design, and people just have gotten attached to the way starcraft is and won't want to change it
after thinking about it some more, i've come to the idea that some minor tweaks can actually introduce new "mini games" into the game and keep it fresh (a minigame is something like a common interaction in a matchup like a group of speed vultures with mines micro vs a group of dragoons)
probably a tough sell still
oh another thing: the core of starcraft is so good (pathing, control groups, mining) that it is a ripe opportunity to make it even better with a more diverse gameplay... even if something new creates expected dynamics in a matchup (i.e. new late game fundamentals or timings) building off already established dynamics (i.e. the classic established fundamentals of a matchup) this can be a good thing
On March 21 2019 05:20 Navane wrote: Underused units are interesting because they are underused. If everything was equaly viable, games would be less predictable and just a random shitfest with too much luck.
you can make a unit predictably viable consecutively instead of viable at a concurrent time with other units thus done one way could create more transitions throughout the game but not more options at once (e.g. a late game viable transition that couldn't be an option in the mid game, thus predictable)
there are only 2 units i would balance in Broodwar DA make their spells cheaper or give them a boost with the amount of energy they get once they are created. and Corsair Dweb same as DA cheaper spells.
other things are ok, well maybe giving the Vulture 2 mines instead of 3.
yeah don't mean to hate on your suggestion but stuff like changing vulture mines to 2 instead of 3 is a large-scale core established gameplay modification, i doubt most of the pros will ever be in favor of such a change (although i'm ready to be convinced otherwise), i realize it was just an example
as to the Dark Archon it is sitting on the edge of viability and could be a balance concern but seems something reasonable to explore potentially
another thought that comes to mind is moving the corsair disruption web research to the cybercore which again has to be verified in terms of balance... oh i see that scout movement is mentioned to cybercore as well, i am skeptical if this would have any effect to the scout's usage
overall i think creating new strong timings is not the right direction, but creating new long-term interaction phases of the game is the better route, like either slow to implement mid-to-late game compositions or new late game compositions that don't have very strong and sharp timings
one of my favorite spells is ensnare, shame to see it on the shelf -- this seems more of an interface issue, there just might be too much to micro already that players don't bother incorporating a clumsy ensnare that may or may not have much effect -- thus such an issue leads the spell into a strong timing or don't use type of situation
i think one good example of what any changes could seek to accomplish is how late game TvZ transitions into the mech-style, although obviously this transition being viable was not the result of changes to the game's design.
off the top of my head early to mid game viability is tougher to introduce because it will create more concurrent options (less predictability) as well as strong timings (fine tuned balance). late game compositional viability like the TvZ mech can probably be more easily analyzed for its overall cost efficiency and apm requirements
I'd be willing to entertain balance through mechanical updates over unit changes as this would also make the game a bit more accessible to new users. Mechanical changes I would like:
The first two definitely solves issues regarding queens and corsairs *Tab through units for abilities *Smart casting where only the closest unit would cast its spell on command The last one is just a quality of life improvement that mostly benefits poor macro players. *Auto mining
Most of those units are so rare used and that's why it's a good thing! Because mostly they are used to humiliate your opponent (like Bisu's scouts vs. Fengzi, BoxeR's nukes to Elky back then) or to catch off guard (NaDa's nuke vs. Larva ). Look what happened to nuke in SC2: it became "tactical nuke", recently so many terrans nuking left and right (there was a game recently where Innovation nuked Serral 20+ times) and no one is freaking out over it.
Only thing I would like is to give scouts upgrades from very start, no price change so it can be used to catch terran off guard and force to make goliaths, this way scouts will secure it's place as harass unit at early game and it won't get out of control, max. 2-3 of them because they're expensive and can be quickly repelled.
On March 22 2019 01:23 BisuDagger wrote: I'd be willing to entertain balance through mechanical updates over unit changes as this would also make the game a bit more accessible to new users. Mechanical changes I would like:
The first two definitely solves issues regarding queens and corsairs *Tab through units for abilities *Smart casting where only the closest unit would cast its spell on command The last one is just a quality of life improvement that mostly benefits poor macro players. *Auto mining
On March 22 2019 01:23 BisuDagger wrote: I'd be willing to entertain balance through mechanical updates over unit changes as this would also make the game a bit more accessible to new users. Mechanical changes I would like:
The first two definitely solves issues regarding queens and corsairs *Tab through units for abilities *Smart casting where only the closest unit would cast its spell on command The last one is just a quality of life improvement that mostly benefits poor macro players. *Auto mining
Heretic!
I mean, I remember arguing that the map should be autoexplored from the start and people were flaming me because of that.
i think a potentially interesting space to explore is allowing mixed groups (casters + non-casters) to still allow a spell cast action to be issued (i suppose this is a subset of the smart casting feature)
there is of course still the case where the group contains two different types of spellcasters
this feature would essentially simplify the control group management. for example, a zerg player could have 11 hydra + 1 queen on each of hotkeys 1,2,3 and get off 3 ensnares with a smooth attack move.
this kind of continues with the theme of simplifying the interface which started with simplifying hotkey management by allowing custom hotkeys. how did the balance turn out on that anyway? was protoss suddenly superpowered without having to reach across the keyboard to hit p?
though this one might have farther reaching consequences, interestingly they decided not to allow control group hotkeys to be customized (i.e. you still needed to use f2-f4 for screen locations and 1 through 0 for control groups)
How much of a change in the meta do you think we could see if progamers actually tried to incorporate more underutilized units without a detriment to viability after the initial learning curve?
We saw queens being utilized more in ZvT to combat heavy tank lines and very rarely we see ensnare in the match up, we see ensnare in ZvP as well when protoss goes sair/reaver.
DA and even reavers before in PvZ were an option but was not seen as a obligatory army composition.
wraiths/valks in TvZ in the 1-1-1 build
I saw flash in one video try sair goons as protoss vs terran and he steamrolled the opponent with d-webs in mid game just off 1 stargate if i remember correctly.
Perhaps some of the reasons why we don't see the underutilized units other than a unit like scouts isn't completely because they aren't viable but simply because it hasn't been practiced or ingrained into the meta long enough to be competitive enough to take that risk in matches.
PvT , Corsair vs Arbiter Debate Pros of Corsair -Faster/cheaper to make 300/200 = 2 corsair vs 100/350 for 1 arbiter for disabling a portion of terran army relative to how much area of effect they have for the cost and time, easier to have excess minerals than it is for gas in resource management. -Corsair movement speed is faster, making it easier to dodge EMPs. -D-web casting range is farther than stasis. -With the sheer number of d-webs relative to how many stasis you'd be able to cast in that time frame your army survivability goes way up vs casting 1-2 stasis in most scenarios.
Cons of Corsair -Isn't as multi-purpose as arbiter who has the ability to recall as well as cloaking field. Cloaking field hardly makes a big difference unless Terran is inattentive with scans or vessels. -You have to build 5-6 corsairs at all times to have a considerable advantage in fights for the population they take up (10-12 vs 8 population for 2 arbiters small difference imo relative to the area of effect you get with corsair vs arbiter) -If they are clumped up together and unattended to, EMP could wipe out your sair fleet energy at once. This is more relying on you playing bad. -Spell duration is only 15 seconds and units under the spell can move, it still buys precious several seconds for siege tanks to move and then resiege in a favorable spot.
2 stasis spells for arbiters can disable anywhere ranging from 6-10 tanks on average, depending on terran army spread and goliath/turret/vessel zoning. Often times progamers have to settle stasis tanks in the front otherwise they wouldn't get it off at all due to vessels/goliath zoning.
4 dweb spells for corsairs can disable anywhere ranging from 8-12 tanks on average, depending on terran army spread and goliath/turret zoning is less of a factor since d-web casting range is a bit further, but EMPs are main thing to avoid and to not clump corsairs which is unlikely since they need to be spread to cast the d-webs all around anyways.
essentially you are putting a long-shot investment into practicing a strategy/mechanical style that may or may not prove to have a payoff
at the same time you are missing out on further refinements and maintenance of established strong strategies/mechanical styles
i think the solution is to have very good players (not pro players) to specialize into one type of new strategy or tactic for one type of matchup to prove its viability at a very high level of play, thus it might convince pro players to incorporate it
---
i know for me it has always been mid-to-late game PvT that has irked me in professional play. generally i find the protoss play using very poor strategy and generally rushing to arbiters too quickly and holding a weak standing army and giving up ground too easily to the terran and not spreading production well throughout the map. for me, the goal in the late mid game is to get to 24 speed zealots and 24 dragoons as soon as possible and then to have another group of 12 (zealots if fighting tanks, dragoons if sniping an economic base) ready for a tactical recall. mind you this is extremely tight on supply, requiring 120 for ground forces, perhaps 60 for probes and then leaving only 20 supply for observers and arbiters (and shuttles if on the field). at 4 supply a pop, arbiters should not be high in number on the field. oh also about 2 templars for hallucination so that's another 4 supply leaving only 16 for arbiters and observers.
if i'm not mistaken you can see this in Rain vs Last in the last ASL on block chain. Last has his push timed perfectly before the rushed arbiter tech and Rain's standing army is too small because of that.
i also find that the engagement on sieged tanks doesn't focus enough on drawing tank fire away from clumps of charging zealots (either by a few spread zealots leading the charge or by shuttles dropping out zealots to draw initial tank fire). makes a big difference if your clumps of zealots can cover a bit more ground before starting to soak the splash damage.
also hallucination i find is a good spell that doesn't get much attention. the main use i hold in mind for hallucination is to essentially force through turret rings. with current terrans playing with extremely quick EMP shots, it perhaps can also soak up some of those. also important is to have your arbiters moving in crafty routes.
i'd say the key points of contention should be unsieged tanks (trying to push forward too quickly), sieged clumps (using splash sucking tactics and zealot recalls), sniping CC using dragoon recalls, and sniping factories (!!) when recalling into the main. this is such a big point i think if you snipe a factory you are essentially killing off production and forcing extra apm to be spent to rebuild them. also costs 100 gas it's basically killing a tank plus delaying production. especially good if you're killing the factories with machine shops on them.
the best play i saw in the last ASL was by Best (in the series against Sharp) even though it was poorly executed, he recalled a force to kill a remote base and then used a secondary recall to evacuate them after a contain was set up. unfortunately by the time he executed the evacuation recall, most of the forces had been killed off.
stasis i don't think is a very good late game spell. i see it as more of a timing/tactical/emergency spell. recall is by far the stronger spell especially if you are playing with a ground force count of 60 (supply cost of 120). i see far too many attempts to rush in and get off some good stasis, forced plays. i think stasis can be good if you have good vision of the area and its clear there is an opportunity and it might also serve to deflect some timing attacks (interestingly researching stasis does not delay recall when you look at how the timings stack up).
in the late game you should be preparing a quick carrier switch by increasing your stargate count from 2 (for arbiters) to at least 5, thus if you can get up 10 carriers while the terran is maxed on tanks and you can delay them from killing all remote bases you can make a strong play.
by far some of the dumbest things i see (besides trying to rush in and attempt to force stasis clumps) is forcing army trades when maxed without having even banked much money or secured much resource locations. people seem to have this magical notion that once they are maxed faster than their opponent they can just throw away units at terrible trading rates and they'll magically remax on some turbo macro, ignoring the fact that a mere 12 zealots cost 1200 minerals and take time to produce.
On March 22 2019 05:50 mishimaBeef wrote: yes i believed it for a long time
essentially you are putting a long-shot investment into practicing a strategy/mechanical style that may or may not prove to have a payoff
at the same time you are missing out on further refinements and maintenance of established strong strategies/mechanical styles
i think the solution is to have very good players (not pro players) to specialize into one type of new strategy or tactic for one type of matchup to prove its viability at a very high level of play, thus it might convince pro players to incorporate it
---
i know for me it has always been mid-to-late game PvT that has irked me in professional play. generally i find the protoss play using very poor strategy and generally rushing to arbiters too quickly and holding a weak standing army and giving up ground too easily to the terran and not spreading production well throughout the map. for me, the goal in the late mid game is to get to 24 speed zealots and 24 dragoons as soon as possible and then to have another group of 12 (zealots if fighting tanks, dragoons if sniping an economic base) ready for a tactical recall. mind you this is extremely tight on supply, requiring 120 for ground forces, perhaps 60 for probes and then leaving only 20 supply for observers and arbiters (and shuttles if on the field). at 4 supply a pop, arbiters should not be high in number on the field. oh also about 2 templars for hallucination so that's another 4 supply leaving only 16 for arbiters and observers.
if i'm not mistaken you can see this in Rain vs Last in the last ASL on block chain. Last has his push timed perfectly before the rushed arbiter tech and Rain's standing army is smaller because of that.
i also find that the engagement on sieged tanks doesn't focus enough on drawing tank fire away from clumps of charging zealots (either by a few spread zealots leading the charge or by shuttles dropping out zealots to draw initial tank fire). makes a big difference if your clumps of zealots can cover a bit more ground before starting to soak the splash damage.
also hallucination i find is a good spell that doesn't get much attention. the main use i hold in mind for hallucination is to essentially force through turret rings. with current terrans playing with extremely quick EMP shots, it perhaps can also soak up some of those. also important is to have your arbiters moving in crafty routes.
i'd say the key points of contention should be unsieged tanks (trying to push forward too quickly), sieged clumps (using splash sucking tactics and zealot recalls), sniping CC using dragoon recalls, and sniping factories (!!) when recalling into the main. this is such a big point i think if you snipe a factory you are essentially killing off production and forcing extra apm to be spent to rebuild them. also costs 100 gas it's basically killing a tank plus delaying production. especially good if you're killing the factories with machine shops on them.
the best play i saw in the last ASL was by best even though it was poorly executed, he recalled a force to kill a remote base and then used a secondary recall to evacuate them after a contain was set up. unfortunately by the time he executed the evacuation recall, most of the forces had been killed off.
stasis i don't think is a very good late game spell. i see it as more of a timing/tactical/emergency spell. recall is by far the stronger spell especially if you are playing with a ground force count of 60 (supply cost of 120). i see far too many attempts to rush in and get off some good stasis, forced plays. i think stasis can be good if you have good vision of the area and its clear there is an opportunity and it might also serve to deflect some timing attacks (interestingly researching stasis does not delay recall when you look at how the timings stack up).
in the late game you should be preparing a quick carrier switch by increasing your stargate count from 2 (for arbiters) to at least 5, thus if you can get up 10 carriers while the terran is maxed on tanks and you can delay them from killing all remote bases you can make a strong play.
by far some of the dumbest things i see is forcing army trades when maxed without having even banked much money or secured much resource locations. people seem to have this magical notion that once they are maxed faster than their opponent they can just throw away units at terrible trading rates and they'll magically remax on some turbo macro, ignoring the fact that a mere 12 zealots cost 1200 minerals and take time to produce.
Agree with a lot of the points you made there. I think stasis plays could use improvement as they forced out by the terran to stasis tanks or units at the front or they lose their arbiters chance to use it. I am wondering about the use of hallucination as well. I tested a few games and I believe hallucinated units are prioritized by the enemy attacks. So if protoss players simply hallucinated more goons/zealots that soak up damage rather than get their HTs sniped by vultures prematurely before they have a chance to cast GOOD storms, then hallucination may be a good alternative depending on the situation. Hallucination realistically would be 1-2 cast per HTs depending on how newly produced they are. But lets say you saved up energy and can cast 2 per HT and you had 5 HTs. That's 20 extra dragoon/zealots instead of leaving up to chance that your HTs can storm enough tanks. If you could theoretically get off 10 storms off your 5 HTs, that would be great! But usually vultures are quick to snipe even if you drop from shuttles. Jangbi did it before but maybe terrans got smarter since then to snipe them.
And the point about researching arbiter energy before the other spells is true. There was video on it explaining there's no reason to not upgrade energy first and then stasis or recall 2nd, because by the time the arbiter finishes building anyways, your energy upgrade and subsequent research would've been finished for your 1st spell to be ready in energy, yet I see progamers still research stasis or recall first, and I'm thinking aren't they supposed to be the expert to know this? Unless they are starving for resources which is unlikely, they have no reason to not research energy first.
I think there's still a lot of growth/improvement and innovation that's still to be explored in the game.
I highly doubt Blizzard will ever implement these changes (or any changes) to BW, but if there's a person/group that makes good UMS versions with these balance changes and many people hop on board, it could possibly become the norm for future tournaments.
This is, of course, just wishful thinking. But not impossible.
I think it's too late to change anything. At this point, I value the convinience of people coming back after time away and understanding the game well.
Look at Dota or something, you leave the scene for 6 months and you don't know anything.
In theory, a couple very small changes could make the game better for the contemporary audience, but it'd be at the expensive of BW's longevity. Furthermore, it opens the door for more and more balance changes, and like mentioned previously, the risk of messing things up is too great. The time for this thread was 2004, not 2019.
On March 22 2019 18:57 AntiHack wrote: This tread is what happen when you're dealing with the sc2 community (Yes, even the bw forum is just sc2 community).
There's no more bw community on TL which is sad.
Totally false.Maybe people don't play as much as they used to be able to but they're still around, at varying activity levels.
On March 22 2019 18:57 AntiHack wrote: This tread is what happen when you're dealing with the sc2 community (Yes, even the bw forum is just sc2 community).
There's no more bw community on TL which is sad.
Totally false.Maybe people don't play as much as they used to be able to but they're still around, at varying activity levels.
aha that reminded me of an idea i had a while back
seeing as how balance is tightly coupled to the map design, is there any good that can come from matchup specific maps?
creating a cool and interesting map for one particular matchup can be done but most times will be imbalanced for some other matchup
maps that are required to fit all 6 matchups greatly reduces the space for innovation and creativity
i think this might be the number one way to breathe fresh ideas into the game without touching any of the core gameplay mechanics. all that is required is a paradigm shift away from the idea that every map is made to fit all matchups.
I am watching Warcraft 3 tour right now and it shows how blizzard can wreck games with their "balance". I would rather keep game as it is rather than have nublizz screw up. With that being said, PvZ seems to be truly upphill battle for Protoss allgame long but how to fix it... Dunno. As for underused units, ghosts atleast product really entertaining games when being used and it was always a joy getting wrecked with Scouts when playing iccup haha.
On March 22 2019 20:30 mishimaBeef wrote: aha that reminded me of an idea i had a while back
seeing as how balance is tightly coupled to the map design, is there any good that can come from matchup specific maps?
creating a cool and interesting map for one particular matchup can be done but most times will be imbalanced for some other matchup
maps that are required to fit all 6 matchups greatly reduces the space for innovation and creativity
i think this might be the number one way to breathe fresh ideas into the game without touching any of the core gameplay mechanics. all that is required is a paradigm shift away from the idea that every map is made to fit all matchups.
I tend to agree, if new, obscure maps were to be introduced fairly sporadically in tournaments, it wouldn't lend too much time to exposing any particular race's major strengths or weaknesses. Could lead to some cool on the spot strats.
On March 22 2019 21:28 whaski wrote: I am watching Warcraft 3 tour right now and it shows how blizzard can wreck games with their "balance". I would rather keep game as it is rather than have nublizz screw up. With that being said, PvZ seems to be truly upphill battle for Protoss allgame long but how to fix it... Dunno. As for underused units, ghosts atleast product really entertaining games when being used and it was always a joy getting wrecked with Scouts when playing iccup haha.
If changing the balance, one of 5-10hp less, one damage less, maybe slightly longer or more expensive research on hydra speed would do it, other option is lowering cannon build time (Protoss traditionally has the fewest Starleague wins, so why not).
I think P vs Z past the early game is good, I think it's just hydra busts early on that skew the win rate in favor of the zerg. Must react perfectly, as a 2 cannons too little means you die, and two cannons too many means you're far behind if they don't fully commit.
Maps can address it though, for example a map like Transistor with either a very small ramp to the natural, or a natural on the high ground.
On March 22 2019 20:30 mishimaBeef wrote: aha that reminded me of an idea i had a while back
seeing as how balance is tightly coupled to the map design, is there any good that can come from matchup specific maps?
creating a cool and interesting map for one particular matchup can be done but most times will be imbalanced for some other matchup
maps that are required to fit all 6 matchups greatly reduces the space for innovation and creativity
i think this might be the number one way to breathe fresh ideas into the game without touching any of the core gameplay mechanics. all that is required is a paradigm shift away from the idea that every map is made to fit all matchups.
I tend to agree, if new, obscure maps were to be introduced fairly sporadically in tournaments, it wouldn't lend too much time to exposing any particular race's major strengths or weaknesses. Could lead to some cool on the spot strats.
ah okay, maybe i didn't fully clarify my idea but it is to have maps that are only played for certain matchups
for example, it is round of 8 in ASL, and for each match, one of the games (perhaps game 2?) is played on a matchup specific map. these maps are highly tuned for the given matchup and are not played on outside of the given matchup. so if it were a TvZ match, then map 2 will be on "the TvZ map"... in another match, say PvZ, then map 2 will be played on "the PvZ map".
the reason this method works is that there is no risk of exposing a weakness of a particular race/matchup for the map because the map is specifically designed to only be played on for a certain matchup
basically the point is to tune towards innovative timings for specific matchups without having to worry about screwing things up with regards to timings in another matchup
off the cuff example: a PvP map (or more generally a mirror match map?) where a 3rd base is very easy to secure. of course this would not be balanced to my understanding in say TvZ since terran will too easily secure a 3rd. no problem though, since the map wouldn't be played for TvZ, there would be a different matchup specific map played for TvZ matches
another quick example: having multiple paths to the main or wider ramps, which would not do well in matches where it's Zerg vs Not-Zerg
maybe these matchup specific maps can be flavored to tie into the lore as well? either through doodads, or naming or what not. and for televised matches would certainly make for some interesting commentary for the typically slower first few minutes of the game.
I dont play BW anymore but it's my favorite game of all time. As much as the scout is a personal favorite of mine (and as much as I think Terran are obviously broken), I dont think the game should be touched at all - units nor mechanics. If it's changed it will truly die imo.
Can anyone try to fiddle with unit sizes and stats? Turn Guardians into medium sized flyers (reduced damage from explosive attacks) maybe a tiiiiny bit of an increase in attack range and flight speed, better deceleration, so it won't just fly into static D blindly.
(Slightly controversial) have its attack deal damage over a small area. Smaller than scarab / siege tank explosion. Lower rate of fire.
(More controversial) add spell: Acid Bomb. Ranged attack, explosive radius of about a siege tank shot, deals damage to both enemy and own units. The unit has to stop completely like a Battlecruiser and charge for a few seconds. Either a direct attack like that, or a plague-like effect that deals some amount of damage over time and doesn't kill, in accordance to the whole acid-corrosion theme. 125 energy, requires 200m 200g to research at Greater Spire.
It would be nice if balance could be done by adjusting maps. Well, actually, it can. But tournament organizers have proven either incapable or unwilling to do so, unfortunately. A large part of that is on the community though too.
People seem to be ok with tournaments trying to crown a protoss every now and then with protoss maps and then going back to same old. Map making seems to be driven each season more by trying to make someone lose or by trying to make a protoss win.
Does that mean blizzard should step in? Probably not, even though some really small and targeted changes would be helpful.. All I personally hope for is that the archon bug helps the PvZ matchup a bit.
On March 19 2019 14:57 kidcrash wrote: How can we make this unit viable without upsetting the natural balance of the game?
The whole premise of the OP is a logical fallacy. If you change anything, you must necessarily upset the natural balance of the game, by definition.
What you need to realize is that even if a unit isn't viable in the current meta and on the current maps, they are still influencing the way the game is played. For example, Queens were one of the main reasons the Mech Switch TvZ is not played anymore. The Dark Archon, which was also considered not viable and was just as rare as the Ghost and Scout, is now making a comeback as an anti-Muta utility in PvZ. In the era of smaller maps, Scouts were a common precursor to an all-in to disrupt a Zerg's economy prior to an attack, and Ghost play was also commonplace. But the meta naturally evolves in the direction of macro because that's how most people want to play; the reason FS was the most-played map of all time was because an easy third base on a four-player map dissuades cheese and requires less tenacious defense, facilitating long defensive games. Thus the Scout and Ghost were phased out in favor of masses of less specialized, more efficient units.
You cannot make changes to units with the current metagame in mind for the sake of unit-inclusivity and expect anything close to the balance that was forged through 19 years of theory and practice without a balance patch. That's what they do with SC2, and that game has never been balanced since release. A strong strategy emerges, and without giving other races time to figure out a solution, they buff the losing race and nerf the winning one, and the whole cycle starts all over. Infestors were king at the end of WoL, and when they got nerfed they disappeared completely for years, and there were people making posts just like this one on the Blizzard forums wondering how to make the Infestor viable. Even the smallest change can have a massive impact on all matchups and ruin such a precipitously balanced game.
I love that Sparkle was around for just long enough to provide complete closure to all these ridiculous balance patch discussions. Radically change the style of map, and Scouts, Queens, and Devourers become the core of the unit composition. The least-used units in so-called "standard" play are now standard on a different map. Was the game better because these units were being used? Of course not, it was more imbalanced than it's ever been. But that's why balancing the game via maps instead of balance patches is such a genius idea. If it doesn't work, just revert back to standard maps and you have a perfectly fine game once again.
Infested Terrans were a gimmick from the campaign that somehow made it into multiplayer. The way that tournament organizers tried to integrated into the other matchups was with Holy World, and almost all Zergs ignored the option. It's for the better that they aren't used.
Ghosts were used all the time in the Boxer era, and they're still useful. Like you mentioned, NaDa (inactive for almost a decade) almost beat Larva (top 5 Zerg in the world) using ghosts and nukes, and Larva barely survived; NaDa definitely would have won if Larva didn't have the extra economy afforded to him by Block Chain. That game was also the most exciting game of a dismal round of 24 because of the exotic strategy involved.
Ultimately the reason why the units mentioned are not used as often is because they fill niche purposes. Scouts are capital ship killers, but since Battlecruisers are never used TvP and Guardians/Devourers are never used ZvP, you don't see them as much. It's not "stubborn" to ignore that these units aren't used. It's simply a function of the maps and the units' interactions with each other.
Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
The way that tournament organizers tried to integrated into the other matchups was with Holy World, and almost all Zergs ignored the option. It's for the better that they aren't used.
Yes, but they're actually imbalanced vs Protoss. Protoss has no answer to hydra busts + infested terrans. It's just not fair for Protoss to have to deal with that unit.
The way that tournament organizers tried to integrated into the other matchups was with Holy World, and almost all Zergs ignored the option. It's for the better that they aren't used.
Yes, but they're actually imbalanced vs Protoss. Protoss has no answer to hydra busts + infested terrans. It's just not fair for Protoss to have to deal with that unit.
See Zero vs Kal.
agree. If an infested terran explodes in a cannon line, it kills so so much. That game in particular was a really nice demonstration for why infested terrans need no buff imo.
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
That would require a lot of command centers and silos to make tanks viable. I think the nerf is too large.
The way that tournament organizers tried to integrated into the other matchups was with Holy World, and almost all Zergs ignored the option. It's for the better that they aren't used.
Yes, but they're actually imbalanced vs Protoss. Protoss has no answer to hydra busts + infested terrans. It's just not fair for Protoss to have to deal with that unit.
See Zero vs Kal.
agree. If an infested terran explodes in a cannon line, it kills so so much. That game in particular was a really nice demonstration for why infested terrans need no buff imo.
I don't think they need a buff either, I don't think they should even be in the game at all. A unit that can only exist in 1 of the 6 possible matchups without a specific map doodad is a stupid idea. But there were only 7 ZvP's played on that map before it was unceremoniously dumped after a single tournament, with only a lukewarm 4-3 record in favor of Zerg. So the specialized Infested Terran attack was hardly a decisive advantage.
The way that tournament organizers tried to integrated into the other matchups was with Holy World, and almost all Zergs ignored the option. It's for the better that they aren't used.
Yes, but they're actually imbalanced vs Protoss. Protoss has no answer to hydra busts + infested terrans. It's just not fair for Protoss to have to deal with that unit.
See Zero vs Kal.
agree. If an infested terran explodes in a cannon line, it kills so so much. That game in particular was a really nice demonstration for why infested terrans need no buff imo.
I don't think they need a buff either, I don't think they should even be in the game at all. A unit that can only exist in 1 of the 6 possible matchups without a specific map doodad is a stupid idea. But there were only 7 ZvP's played on that map before it was unceremoniously dumped after a single tournament, with only a lukewarm 4-3 record in favor of Zerg. So the specialized Infested Terran attack was hardly a decisive advantage.
I never said it was an open and shut case. Furthermore, while I haven't watched the other ZvPs on that map, I have a hard time believing all the Zergs tried out the same strat that Zero did on that map so that is the only game that we have that shows how strong they can be against a competent toss such as Kal.
That logic works both ways. The players generally develop their strategies for tournament games on each map over dozens of practice games. So if the majority ignored the CC it was probably determined in practice that it wasn't viable except as a surprise tactic. In the 7 Holy World games, the neutral CC was completely ignored except for the Zero vs Kal game, and BackHo vs Gorush where BackHo destroyed the CC preemptively when he had an idle moment in the center of the map. No other Zerg bothered to infest it, nor did Protoss see fit to destroy it. So maybe it's a small sample size, but the fact that the neutral CC prop has only been used on one map, in one tournament, in the entire 19 year history of competitive BW is evidence that tournament organizers don't consider it a good addition to the game.
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
That would require a lot of command centers and silos to make tanks viable. I think the nerf is too large.
You could make up for it by buffing Blind spell, of course.
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
Balance changes are needed for BW to become successfu, i agree on that part. But the tank, really? It's one of the most over powered units in the game... When thinking a lot about what units need balance i think of one unit in particular: the volture. It does like 1 damage to TANKS and can blow up their own TANKS with mines. -> make so mines don't do friendly fire atleast
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
Balance changes are needed for BW to become successfu, i agree on that part. But the tank, really? It's one of the most over powered units in the game... When thinking a lot about what units need balance i think of one unit in particular: the volture. It does like 1 damage to TANKS and can blow up their own TANKS with mines. -> make so mines don't do friendly fire atleast
I hope you're joking because it really sounds like a joke
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
Balance changes are needed for BW to become successfu, i agree on that part. But the tank, really? It's one of the most over powered units in the game... When thinking a lot about what units need balance i think of one unit in particular: the volture. It does like 1 damage to TANKS and can blow up their own TANKS with mines. -> make so mines don't do friendly fire atleast
I hope you're joking because it really sounds like a joke
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
Thank you xD
On March 23 2019 17:20 A.Alm wrote:
On March 23 2019 08:13 ninazerg wrote: Obviously, there are some balance changes that Brood War needs right now. We all know that the game not perfectly balanced, and requires some changes if the game is going to be successful. As it stands, right now, the Terran siege tank is wildly underpowered and is useless in most match-ups. I have long be an advocate of increasing its health slightly from 150 to 9999, and changing its attack to a nuclear missile launch.
Balance changes are needed for BW to become successfu, i agree on that part. But the tank, really? It's one of the most over powered units in the game... When thinking a lot about what units need balance i think of one unit in particular: the volture. It does like 1 damage to TANKS and can blow up their own TANKS with mines. -> make so mines don't do friendly fire atleast
I hope you're joking because it really sounds like a joke
EPT
)
