|
Thanks to Reddit sleuths, everyone can try the LotV test maps by following instructions here. Note: This is not a beta key, it is simply access to Vs. AI and a Unit Tester. I have no idea how cool with this Blizzard is or is not, use at your own risk. |
On March 30 2015 22:41 The_Red_Viper wrote: Ah btw, where is Aeromi when you need him (schedule for the beta is missing!!!^^) We don't need to know the schedule for the beta though.
|
Assuming the cost of supply depots and such is halved and that all units are double supply and that strategies do not change, I don't know if it will have any sort of obvious effect. In all match-ups both races reach 100 supply somewhere around the same time, there is (afaik) less divergence here than if you were to compare it to the 200 supply mark. While e.g. zerg might get to 200 supply more quickly than protoss, this effect is less (afaik again) in both absolute and relative terms when you revisit this question for 100 supply. This means that your timing window to do something useful at 100 supply is vanishingly small and you can't conclude that it will obviously stop turtling strategies.
The main thing that will happen if you lower the supply cap is that players will be annoyed they're reaching the cap so quickly.
|
Colossus is an artifact of poor design from WoL and should just be scrapped IMO. It is the pinnacle of "a-move and nothing more" gameplay. The only micro involved in the unit is moving it backwards every so often.
|
On March 30 2015 23:57 Aeromi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2015 22:41 The_Red_Viper wrote: Ah btw, where is Aeromi when you need him (schedule for the beta is missing!!!^^) We don't need to know the schedule for the beta though. To know when we'll see the first beta streams^^
|
On March 30 2015 23:48 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I am not sure if the problem is because protoss units are too strong working together or they are too weak working seperately. It could be both. T With reagards to working seperately. The main issue isn't how they scale, but rather that both zerg and terran can split up their units and then retreat if one of the groups gets outnumbered. Toss can't really do that. Say you go Stalker and Collosus and split them into two groups. Ok the Stalkers can retreat, but the Collosus can't, so if the neemy just attacks the Collosus with his main army, your fucked. This is why I am a big proponent of increasing the overall mobility of protoss and getting rid of the AA vulnerability of Collosus (they needs to be redesigned FYI).
Let's be real. This is not an issue it's a test of skill that is something that makes the Protoss matchups fun to watch. Protoss has already a lot of very mobile units like Phoenix, Oracles and blink Stalkers. A Unit like the collosus being vulnerable when split from the main army is actually good design and not a problem. The collosus is a dull unit but it's actually much less of an issue in the current meta game and it may be even more redundant to change it with LOTV.
|
So is beta live now on Korea? If not I guess there is only 1 US beta server and it will go online in 13 hours?
|
Does anyone know who will be granted acces to the beta? I have confirmed in my battle.net profile settings to be initerested in testing beta stuff. Do I have a slight chance?
|
If you were to describe the colossus: an expensive, slow-moving, highly vulnerable unit, dealing area of effect damage over time.
i.e. a unit that makes sense to add to your army in the final stages of crafting your composition to deal its superior damage, but which can not stand on its own.
I can't think of a good way to make this design work for a game like Starcraft 2. It fits Supreme Commander, which is a game that plays out on a bigger scale and where an army is like a basic unit; that's a framework for which strongly synergistic units can work out. Starcraft is based on smaller groups interacting with each other, an army is not a basic unit but a collection of groups that should be able to function independently lest you be forced into inflexible death ball-esque compositions. If colossi can not do this then they should be redesigned or phased out (and to be honest I feel the same way about the sentry and the SC2 siege tank, among other units).
|
On March 30 2015 22:57 Tenks wrote: Was Terran really given anything to help out with tank drops TvT? It is already pretty popular to follow up your opening gambit with doom dropping the Terran main with like 3-4 tanks and a bunch of marines. The strategy works because you can SCV pull the main to overwhelm the tanks so it doesn't make the drop free because it resets their tank count (and if they didn't do enough army damage you can just immediately counter attack and win.) I'm not sure how Terran will deal with it. Maybe lock Cyclones onto the Medivacs and do the same? Cyclones shit on pretty much everything including tank drops.
|
On March 30 2015 23:48 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I am not sure if the problem is because protoss units are too strong working together or they are too weak working seperately. It could be both. T With reagards to working seperately. The main issue isn't how they scale, but rather that both zerg and terran can split up their units and then retreat if one of the groups gets outnumbered. Toss can't really do that. Say you go Stalker and Collosus and split them into two groups. Ok the Stalkers can retreat, but the Collosus can't, so if the neemy just attacks the Collosus with his main army, your fucked. This is why I am a big proponent of increasing the overall mobility of protoss and getting rid of the AA vulnerability of Collosus (they needs to be redesigned FYI).
I think you meant to put IMO instead of FYI.
|
On March 31 2015 00:03 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2015 23:57 Aeromi wrote:On March 30 2015 22:41 The_Red_Viper wrote: Ah btw, where is Aeromi when you need him (schedule for the beta is missing!!!^^) We don't need to know the schedule for the beta though. To know when we'll see the first beta streams^^ As soon as possible which means April 1st.
|
I just thought about the sieged tank drops and came to the conclusion that it has the potential to ruin the greatest art that ever existed in SC2, that is marine-tank TvT. Granted, Blizzard has been doing everything possible for quite some time to prevent the game from even reaching that stage, but when it ever happens, positional marine-tank play can be pretty awesome. But this play is based on the fact that your tanks cannot move while sieged, which will no longer be the case ...
|
On March 30 2015 23:54 Kranyum wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2015 23:48 Hider wrote:I am not sure if the problem is because protoss units are too strong working together or they are too weak working seperately. It could be both. T With reagards to working seperately. The main issue isn't how they scale, but rather that both zerg and terran can split up their units and then retreat if one of the groups gets outnumbered. Toss can't really do that. Say you go Stalker and Collosus and split them into two groups. Ok the Stalkers can retreat, but the Collosus can't, so if the neemy just attacks the Collosus with his main army, your fucked. This is why I am a big proponent of increasing the overall mobility of protoss and getting rid of the AA vulnerability of Collosus (they needs to be redesigned FYI). Did I hear: Reaver?
The Disruptor is tbh more similar to the Reaver, and therefore the Collosus can't be like that (too overlapping). With the Collosus I would like to see this - not as this tier 3 giant deathball late game unit. But rather as a bit of the counterpart to the Immortal. The Immortal = Good vs armored. Collosus = Good vs light. Blizzards job should be to make the Colossus feel different from the Disruptor while promoting alot more micro and make it less of a unit that creates stale gameplay.
Starcraft is based on smaller groups interacting with each other, an army is not a basic unit but a collection of groups that should be able to function independently lest you be forced into inflexible death ball-esque compositions. If colossi can not do this then they should be redesigned or phased out (and to be honest I feel the same way about the sentry and the SC2 siege tank, among other units).
I think the Warp Prism needs a significant role for protoss. When you get outnumbered and Collosus can't escape by them self --> Pick them up. This means that it doesn't become a dead neccesity to pick a fight with Collosus when you have less than critical mass. But as long as the AA vulnerability exists, the enemy will always have hardcounters to the Warp Prism.
|
On March 31 2015 00:15 opisska wrote: I just thought about the sieged tank drops and came to the conclusion that it has the potential to ruin the greatest art that ever existed in SC2, that is marine-tank TvT. Granted, Blizzard has been doing everything possible for quite some time to prevent the game from even reaching that stage, but when it ever happens, positional marine-tank play can be pretty awesome. But this play is based on the fact that your tanks cannot move while sieged, which will no longer be the case ...
You can still only pick up and drop 1 tank at a time. It isn't much different than unsieging and repositioning the tank.
|
On March 31 2015 00:21 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2015 23:54 Kranyum wrote:On March 30 2015 23:48 Hider wrote:I am not sure if the problem is because protoss units are too strong working together or they are too weak working seperately. It could be both. T With reagards to working seperately. The main issue isn't how they scale, but rather that both zerg and terran can split up their units and then retreat if one of the groups gets outnumbered. Toss can't really do that. Say you go Stalker and Collosus and split them into two groups. Ok the Stalkers can retreat, but the Collosus can't, so if the neemy just attacks the Collosus with his main army, your fucked. This is why I am a big proponent of increasing the overall mobility of protoss and getting rid of the AA vulnerability of Collosus (they needs to be redesigned FYI). Did I hear: Reaver? The Disruptor is tbh more similar to the Reaver, and therefore th Collosus can't be like that (way too overlapping). With the Collosus I would like to see this - not as this tier 3 giant deathball late game unit. But rather as a bit of the counterpart to the Immortal. The Immortal = Good vs armored. Collosus = Good vs light. Blizzards job should be to make the Colossus feel different from the Disruptor while promoting alot more micro and make it less of a unit that creates stale gameplay. If two Colossi fire at the same spot right now, I guess the damage from their lasers adds up? Wouldn't deleting that promote the use of Colossi less as a unit that you can never have enough of and more as a pure support unit, ie having 2 or 3 of them is good but having 4+ becomes less efficient?
|
Colossus follows the Ghostbusters rule of never crossing the beams?
|
On March 31 2015 00:25 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2015 00:21 Hider wrote:On March 30 2015 23:54 Kranyum wrote:On March 30 2015 23:48 Hider wrote:I am not sure if the problem is because protoss units are too strong working together or they are too weak working seperately. It could be both. T With reagards to working seperately. The main issue isn't how they scale, but rather that both zerg and terran can split up their units and then retreat if one of the groups gets outnumbered. Toss can't really do that. Say you go Stalker and Collosus and split them into two groups. Ok the Stalkers can retreat, but the Collosus can't, so if the neemy just attacks the Collosus with his main army, your fucked. This is why I am a big proponent of increasing the overall mobility of protoss and getting rid of the AA vulnerability of Collosus (they needs to be redesigned FYI). Did I hear: Reaver? The Disruptor is tbh more similar to the Reaver, and therefore th Collosus can't be like that (way too overlapping). With the Collosus I would like to see this - not as this tier 3 giant deathball late game unit. But rather as a bit of the counterpart to the Immortal. The Immortal = Good vs armored. Collosus = Good vs light. Blizzards job should be to make the Colossus feel different from the Disruptor while promoting alot more micro and make it less of a unit that creates stale gameplay. If two Colossi fire at the same spot right now, I guess the damage from their lasers adds up? Wouldn't deleting that promote the use of Colossi less as a unit that you can never have enough of and more as a pure support unit, ie having 2 or 3 of them is good but having 4+ becomes less efficient?
I don't really understand your example, but the main reason why you prefer to turtle (or all in) with the Collosus is that they become useless without enough protection. Regardless of what small tweaks you do here, this isn't something that can be changed through small balance adjustments. Generally speaking, there are different ways a unit can be designed without promoting turtly gameplay.
(1) It's positionally strong (e.g. BW Siege tank and Lurker) (2) It's mobile enough to move out on the map and escape when outnumbered (3) It has very strong synergy with the Warp Prism/something that can make it escape.
For the Immortal I prefer the second solution and for the Collosus I would like to see the 3rd solution (this requires removal of AA vulnerability amongst other changes).
|
On March 30 2015 22:51 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2015 22:16 -Kyo- wrote:On March 30 2015 21:09 theBALLS wrote: have they begun sending out invites yet? No, not to my knowledge. It's actually quite bizarre. The beta starts tomorrow and there are quite a few people like myself who even know their account is going to be flagged but it has not happened yet. My email was contacted by ESL for WCS placements and there are roughly 120 other people who need to be given access as they have already been notified by ESL as well. It's really weird considering the client is available to a few... the thing starts tomorrow... It's honestly kind of worrisome haha >.> I assume they're just going to do it all at once on the 31st, though that is really odd considering we don't know what time it starts/how to dl client or really anything else at all yet.. Typical morons from Blizzard.. they're too busy making money out of WoW, Hearthstone and whatever else. What happened to their passion for StarCraft? Inform yourselves people before you say such things..
On March 30 2015 06:34 Ramiz1989 wrote:
|
On March 31 2015 00:25 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2015 00:15 opisska wrote: I just thought about the sieged tank drops and came to the conclusion that it has the potential to ruin the greatest art that ever existed in SC2, that is marine-tank TvT. Granted, Blizzard has been doing everything possible for quite some time to prevent the game from even reaching that stage, but when it ever happens, positional marine-tank play can be pretty awesome. But this play is based on the fact that your tanks cannot move while sieged, which will no longer be the case ... You can still only pick up and drop 1 tank at a time. It isn't much different than unsieging and repositioning the tank.
isnt much difference?, unsieging and repositioning took like 15 seconds and you where vulnerable. With drop ship it takes like 2-3 seconds
|
On March 31 2015 00:56 SuperYo1000 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2015 00:25 Tenks wrote:On March 31 2015 00:15 opisska wrote: I just thought about the sieged tank drops and came to the conclusion that it has the potential to ruin the greatest art that ever existed in SC2, that is marine-tank TvT. Granted, Blizzard has been doing everything possible for quite some time to prevent the game from even reaching that stage, but when it ever happens, positional marine-tank play can be pretty awesome. But this play is based on the fact that your tanks cannot move while sieged, which will no longer be the case ... You can still only pick up and drop 1 tank at a time. It isn't much different than unsieging and repositioning the tank. isnt much difference?, unsieging and repositioning took like 15 seconds and you where vulnerable. With drop ship it takes like 2-3 seconds
If E, rclick, shift D took you 15 seconds you may have bigger issues
|
|
|
|