|
On June 20 2015 17:47 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +But for all other units, the same effect can be accomplished by adjusting the range and movement speed of units while maintaining 0 damage point. Arguing that the Hydralisks, Immortal, Banshee or Oracle should have 0.167 DP becaue it makes them harder to master and using the Hellion as an example is very flawed logic. Lets say u add 0 damage point to all units. And now you adjust the range and movementspeed. This could backfire(?) The movementspeed increase and range increase could maybe work in relation to lets say hellion vs ling but the ling might go out of hand vs other units. Feels like it would be hard to find a general good solution here, adding damage point and backswings makes this alot easier.
I am not really thinking of the Speedling here. Its movement speed is already high enough which makes it capable of dealing damage when enemy units attempt to kite it. It will therefore not be noticeably affected by 0 damage point on Immortal, Hydralisk and Roaches. Rather the more obvious candidates for movement speed increase is the Zealot and the Ultralisk (instead of +2 armor, increase its movement speed off-creep).
In terms of air units, the obvious candidates are Oracle, Broodlord, Tempest, Banshee and Viking. The former, will however, continue to be a mess due to low acceleration value and fast attack speed, so it won't be noticeable improved. The latter 4 could benefit from 0 DP along with small range reductions.
(Range reduction probably wouldn't be needed for the Banshee if terrans could build turrets without ebay.).
|
If Blizzard would write these posts every two weeks everyone would be much happier, and I'm even sure that the design would improve by virtue of David Kim being more accountable for his actions by having to justify them in public.
Not that I agree with his examples. And I still don't understand Blizzard's internal policies. You sometimes get the impression that they just ignore every idea out there, but then they do admit in posts like this that they've done "internal testing", but again I'm not sure about the quality of this or whether it's comprehensive at all.
|
I think the most ignored aspect of damage point is how it helps bringing exposition times for the unit to be damaged while maintaining some qualities of the unit (speed and range) intact, and prevents infinite damage-free kiting.
You can obtain the same thing by making the kited unit faster than the unit that kites it. In this proces you avoid the "infinitive kiting without taking damage"-problem.
Or if its absolutely neccesary that one unit has a certain minimum speed, you can adjust attack ranges so the unit needs to get into "danger"-zone before it attacks (where it will take damage) but immediately afterwards they can move back.
For instance you could have a group of Vultures moving into "danger zone" to snipe a Hydralisk ---> Move back --> Wait for cooldown to come back up --> move in again.
In this proces they are making the best out of the long attack cooldown by moving out of the attack range of the Hydralisks, and when they are ready to attack again, they return to snipe another Hydralisk. Had they stayed to attack the Hydralisks, they would easily have lost the battle as the Hydralisks attacks much faster. This type of micro isn't possible with a damage point above 0.1.
For example, you can nerf Stalker speed a bit and remove damage point, but then you will make stalkers even worse at retreating against roaches. And then there is a ton of problems asociated to the strength of meele units vs kitings.
I know there are specific situations where you need a damage point. In fact when Starbow had a Viking around a year ago, I suggested to give it a damage point as a movement speed change or range would have unintended consequences (http://starbowmod.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=524)
But your job as a designer should be make it fun to control units. When the majority of the target group says they prefer responsive 0 DP units, you should use a damage point as a last-resort thing. With regards to the Stalker, it should be able to function fine w/ 5.5 range.
It is also important on drop techniques, since 0 damage point Immortal would just fire instantly, so with optimal micro you can't even damage immortals.
If you give other ranged units such as Roaches, bio, Hydralisks 0 DP as well, they will also be able to deal their damage out faster to the Immortal. The only unit that will suffer is the Hellion due to it maintaining the 0.25 damage point. So generally, you won't be able to make some type of infinitive drop Immortal "kiting" micro.
Therefore, the consequences won't be as dramastic as you make it out to be, but it's true that its a buff to Immortal drops. But isn't this a good thing? Especially since Blizzard seem interested in more Immortal dropplay, and with this change you might actually be able to reduce the pickup range of the Warp Prism.
|
Hider, you didnt answer my post. "Will it not have unindended consequences", the hellion vs ling was just an example.
Roaches have a projectile so they will not be able to damage those 0 damage point immortals microed from a warpprism.
A more elegant solution would be to put a delay on the warpprism, 0,5-1 sec before the units from the warpprism can fire.
The thing with backswing and damage point = Position matter more. Easier to retreat.
In this proces they are making the best out of the long attack cooldown by moving out of the attack range of the Hydralisks, and when they are ready to attack again, they return to snipe another Hydralisk. Had they stayed to attack the Hydralisks, they would easily have lost the battle as the Hydralisks attacks much faster. This type of micro isn't possible with a damage point above 0.1
Vultures have a damage point and its high in broodwar. It works anyway cuz of the move while shoot type of micro in that game.
Same with mutalisks, they can move and shoot at the same time with micro but they do have a high damage point or maybe it was backswing with a big deacceleration. They are really hard to control in that game btw, requires some really hard practice.
They are more ways to add micro to units.
EXAMPLE:
Marines could be able to walk and shoot at the same time but with a lower movement speed.
I could see this potentially be alot easier to tweak into the game so it fits vs alot of units and not just vs one, compared to adding 0 damagepoint/backswing to all units.
Again, i think it would be hard to maintain a general good relationship between alot of units with 0 damagepoint.
Zealot vs marine might work decent or maybe well but the zealots might go out of hand to easy vs other units etc.
I remember some folks over at starbow a long time ago trying hydralisks vs zealots with 0 damage each, they adjusted the movementspeed etc of the units.
They came to conclusion that it didnt work since it went one sided what ever they did.
|
Roaches have a projectile so they will not be able to damage those 0 damage point immortals microed from a warpprism.
But they will be able to deal damage because the load/unload is not 0 seconds (but rather something like 0.2 seconds). As long as the unit has 0 damage point, a projectile is not enough to make a unit that is close to the warpprism/immortal not capable of dealing damage.
As a proof, remember that you actually already have a 6 range unit with 0 damage point that deals extra damage vs armored in the game. Yes the Maurauder functions like that, and I have never heard anyone complain about how imbalanced instant load/unload is due to its 0 damage point. Unload delay is only needed for units with much higher range.
Vultures have a damage point and its high in broodwar. It works anyway cuz of the move while shoot type of micro in that game .
Vultures can clearly attack instantly (thus 0 damage point), but instead they have a low acceleration value (after attacking) that can be circumvented through patrol micro. The effect of this is something that could be compared to a "-0.1" damage point, since it actually can attack and move back faster than a unit with 0 damage point in Sc2.
Zealot vs marine might work decent or maybe well but the zealots might go out of hand to easy vs other units etc.
Versus which units? You set damage point to 0 for ranged units = They become better at kiting
Then you buff the speed of Zealots/Ultralisks --> They can still deal damage while being kited.
Will it require some balance tweaking to get the balance right? Sure, but that's the case for every change you make.
|
Ok, so ive been trying to think of how further to increase the incentive to expand more. In my opinion its very hard to make a larger amount of expansions mainly because of the supply that workers use.
What about something along these lines :
Every nexus, command center and hatchery gave "worker only supply" as in every Nexus gives you 10 Probe supply orbitals 7, and hatcheries 5. This would cap your supply at 250 - 200 + (50 bonus)
If they increase the incentive to make inbase nexus, this should be equal to command centers. Hatcheries are also the production facilities and can be made at a rate of 2/base if really needed.
|
As a proof, remember that you actually already have a 6 range unit with 0 damage point that deals extra damage vs armored in the game. Yes the Maurauder functions like that, and I have never heard anyone complain about how imbalanced instant load/unload is due to its 0 damage point. Unload delay is only needed for units with much higher range.
Not proof of anything.
Immortal vs ling/roach or pure roach is a crucial part of pvz(or atleast was).
Nothing can shoot up while stalkers usually involve for protoss in pvt that can shoot the medivacs.
Zealots have no damage point btw so they can still hit those marauders.
Vultures can clearly attack instantly (thus 0 damage point), but instead they have a low acceleration value (after attacking) that can be circumvented through patrol micro. The effect of this is something that could be compared to a "-0.1" damage point, since it actually can attack and move back faster than a unit with 0 damage point in Sc2.
You might be correct about the vulture, you are still wrong that its impossible to have that scenario if units dont have 0 damage point.
Versus which units? You set damage point to 0 for ranged units = They become better at kiting
Then you buff the speed of Zealots/Ultralisks --> They can still deal damage while being kited.
Will it require some balance tweaking to get the balance right? Sure, but that's the case for every change you make.
Thats why i said it might go out of hand=Impossible to balance.
Versus which units?
Thats exactly the question i was asking, i cant know since i dont know the movementspeed yet. And what relationship that is supposed to be set.
|
The thing with backswing and damage point = Position matter more. Easier to retreat.
To an extent, yes, however the biggest reasons its impossible for certain compositions to retreat is due to huge movement speed assymetries. When the zerg army/bio army moves at 3+ movement speed and all of the expensive protoss units move at 2.25, you are creating a dynamic where a protoss is basically all-in when moving out on the map. He simply cannot afford to lose the battle as he has no way of retreating.
Damage point only plays a minor role here. The most important thing is to make sure that ranged ground units (across races) have somewhat similar movement speed. Preferably between 2.75 and 3.25.
Melee units should generally be 0.5-0.75 faster than ranged units. This makes sure that escaping is realistic while avoiding the infinite kiting problem.
The only situation where it makes sense to have a noticeably lower movement speed is when you want to define certain units as being positional or defensive. But the inbetween (2-2.5 speed) is generally a bad idea.
Thats exactly the question i was asking, i cant know since i dont know the movementspeed yet. And what relationship that is supposed to be set.
Ideally I would suggest to remove Zealot charge and replace it with a constant 3.4 movement speed. (Concussive shell should also be reworked in this proces).
Ultralisk off creep could be 3.75 with lower creep speed modifier (and lower model size), and no armor buffs.
Not proof of anything.
Immortal vs ling/roach or pure roach is a crucial part of pvz(or atleast was).
Nothing can shoot up while stalkers usually involve for protoss in pvt that can shoot the medivacs.
Ever played bio vs Roaches while feeling that Maurauder drop micro was way too strong without any counterplay? No? Me neither.
That's the important part to understand here: It's a buff to Immortal drops, but it doesn't make them unkillable/extremely overpowered/broken.
It's a mistake to argue that a unit shouldn't receive 0 damage point because that change (when viewed in isolation) might make it slightly too strong in some situations. Instead the intention should be to make the unit fun to control and find a way to balance it around this element.
The Hellion is an example of a unit that wold be broken with 0 damage point. You cannot adjust other numbers to make this unit work well with 0 damage point. But that's not the case for any other unit in the game.
Broken =/ Slightly imbalanced.
Slightly imbalanced = Can fit into the game if balanced properly.
|
I'm not sure about other topics but can't agree with this part:
There was a post asking if players want battles to last much longer. Our thoughts are that the current pace feels really good, and we were happy to see that most players didn’t want battles to last longer in StarCraft II.
Protoss was my main race in WoL and I switched to Terran in HotS so I'll focus on these two races. I disagree because I think that there are situations in sc2, especially in TvP, when the battles are way too short. If a 25 minute game gets decided in a battle that lasts slightly longer than Psi Storm's duration I can't call it a good pace. Please note that I'm not calling storms overpowered, I just think some unit compositions die or kill stuff too fast. I'm not saying all battles or unit compositions in sc2 are like this but certainly some of them are and I think it there is a room for improvement. The problem (at least in my opinion it is a problem) has a few aspects that need to be discussed separately.
Firstly, I am aware that spells with high damage output like Psi Storm or Disruptor's active can be dodged. Generally I don't mind the existence of such spells but in some cases they do so much damage that the battle is over before you can say their full name out loud. And it's not like the losing players has to retreat, his whole army is simply gone. It's good that you can micro your units to avoid such distasters but it's bad that you can't micro yourself out of getting absolutely destroyed after you get hit.
"Glass cannon" unit compositions are another problem. They offer huge dps but their durability is really low which results in 10 seconds battles, regardless of who is winning them. If a Terran goes full bio or bio mine against Protoss you can't really expect to see long, micro intensive battles. Yes, Terran harass can be very exciting to watch but at some point the players will have to fight and usually it's not pretty. I understand that sometimes the game forces the player to use glass cannons and I don't blame them for that but I think it's a design problem that should be fixed.
On the other hand the battles between very durable compositions like roach wars in ZvZ are really boring, so obviously high dps units are necessary. My point is that the game shouldn't allow unit compositions that don't have any tankiness whatsoever unless it's a strictly harassment focused composition with an option to transition into something else. Mutalisk based compositions are a good example because the Zerg can transition into Hive units later. Most of the time full bio Terran is stuck making bio till the end of the game.
Some people could say that only noobs want the battles to last longer because they're bad and want the game to be more forgiving. I can't agree with that because I don't see how battles that last a few seconds are healthy for the game. Nobody wants to watch that and nobody wants to see his army evaporate before he can do anything about it. Just because something makes the game harder doesn't mean it's good.
Last thing I want to discuss isn't strictly related to the pacing of sc2 battles but I think it's worth mentioning. In my opinion the game has a problem with "20 min no rush" compositions. They work like a time bomb and are very boring to watch because we're forced to observe like 10-15 minutes of macroing and maybe some light harassment before the big, usually game-deciding battle. Blizzard already addressed this with fixing VR-Colossus, BL-Infestor, Swarm Hosts or Avilomech but I think it's still a problem. Phoenix-Collosus in PvT is an example of a boring but relatively balanced unit composition. The Protoss player doesn't intend to attack before maxing out because he doesn't have any offensive tools and the other player can't force him to move out. I think such unit compositions should be patched out and replaced with something that gives both players offensive options at any point of the game.
On June 20 2015 19:59 weikor wrote:
Ok, so ive been trying to think of how further to increase the incentive to expand more. In my opinion its very hard to make a larger amount of expansions mainly because of the supply that workers use.
What about something along these lines :
Every nexus, command center and hatchery gave "worker only supply" as in every Nexus gives you 10 Probe supply orbitals 7, and hatcheries 5. This would cap your supply at 250 - 200 + (50 bonus)
If they increase the incentive to make inbase nexus, this should be equal to command centers. Hatcheries are also the production facilities and can be made at a rate of 2/base if really needed.
Do you mean 200+50 supply for workers and units combined or completely separate supply limits for workers and units? I like both options, don't know if they're the right direction but experimenting with them wouldn't hurt.
|
Honestly if we are going to look at the supply cap (which I think is an excellent discussion to have) I think we first need to look at the efficiency of mining (here we go again) since thats where the majority of the supply is held in, and the overall supply cost of units. Honestly I see no harm in dropping supply costs of roach, hydra, tanks, colossus, etc.. if it means more supply to use for harassing forces.
|
On June 20 2015 13:02 ZeromuS wrote:
Now I just need to convince them to apply no worker pairing alongside a LotV approach
Yup.
The only thing that's still disappointing to me; Their wording that indicates they think it's either DH (or better, no worker pairing) or the current LotV model.
Blizzard, if you're reading this; Remove worker pairing. Doesn't matter how much minerals the bases have, if the patches are all the same amount or not, how many starting workers there are, just remove worker pairing. It doesn't do the game any good.
|
After watching LOLDROPS win TvP again in Game2 of today's [S2SL] Grand Finals Season 2 2015, I've come to realize what they mean by the DH eco model not making much difference.
LOLDROPS are too powerful for your opponents to have more than three bases!!!
Once again, the medivac and other terrain/map negating units ruin anything possibly good coming out of SC2.
|
United States7483 Posts
Note the careful wording: they don't want to encourage more expanding, necessarily. They want to encourage FASTER expanding.
Everything seems like it's aimed at making games develop faster and play out sooner.
This is the opposite of what I'd like, as it really hurts a lot of the strategic depth and has some pretty unfortunate side effects on tech and tech based strategies and play, but it is what it is.
Any econ system proposed to replace the current LOTV model (which I despise personally) is going to have to address the fact that they want to encourage people to expand very quickly.
*sigh*
|
On June 20 2015 23:15 Whitewing wrote:
Note the careful wording: they don't want to encourage more expanding, necessarily. They want to encourage FASTER expanding.
Everything seems like it's aimed at making games develop faster and play out sooner.
This is the opposite of what I'd like, as it really hurts a lot of the strategic depth and has some pretty unfortunate side effects on tech and tech based strategies and play, but it is what it is.
Any econ system proposed to replace the current LOTV model (which I despise personally) is going to have to address the fact that they want to encourage people to expand very quickly.
*sigh*
You are completely right and I totally agree.
They're trying to chance the game for new players, not for the remaining ones. I fear that that isn't going to work.
|
Yeah, the tragedy is that DK knew loldrops were too powerful back in HoTS beta, hence the photon overcharge, there's noway protoss can defend without it.
But he's so enamoured by this type of gameplay, which I deem super gay, that he's doubling down on it again in LoTV. Faster medivac unloads, unkillable nydus, overlord carry upgrades, and warp prism pickup range increase. WTF!!!
Just look at the top 3 complaints in the TL LoTV section.
1. General dissatisfaction of unit design
2. Battles end too quickly
3. Eco model
All three are heavily influenced by this drop emphasizing gamestyle.
1. Every unit must accomodate the drop style gameplay
2. Battles end quickly because there's no room for retreat -- your back is against the wall already defending against drops
3. Eco model is useless because you can't defend more than three bases against loldrops
They should really rename the game to Dropcraft and be done with it.
|
On June 20 2015 23:32 jotmang-nojem wrote:
Yeah, the tragedy is that DK knew loldrops were too powerful back in HoTS beta, hence the photon overcharge, there's noway protoss can defend without it.
Main reason for photon overcharge isn't loldrops but prevent heavy one base pvp.
|
well I remember his saying protoss needed it to free up units to go on offense. That's why protoss also received Recall. Otherwise, they'd be too pigeonholed to do anything but defend.
Doesn't change the fact that protoss would die the way loldrops are used nowadays without photon overcharge. Just look at today's game. Chintoss defended drop after drop but just one mistake and the game was over.
|
Yeah, the tragedy is that DK knew loldrops were too powerful back in HoTS beta, hence the photon overcharge, there's noway protoss can defend without it.
Reverse order. Medivac speed boost was implemented partly due to Photon Overcharge making dropplay oboslete.
|
United States4883 Posts
On June 20 2015 17:33 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 15:43 Qwyn wrote:On June 20 2015 14:54 usethis2 wrote:
I hope this response from DK will finally quiet down the outcry of "We want DH economy!"
Blizz said really nicely without offending anyone that so-called DH economy is a trash and they have internal testings to back it up. I wish TL were a bit more careful in causing a mindless uproar. But it's not trash! It's actually quite brilliantly designed and aesthetically pleasing. Have you played with it? Try this. Spread 8x6 workers (8 workers on each base). Compare your mineral income to 16x3 (16 workers on each base). DH 3x3 WORKS! It accomplishes its major goal - allowing players to have more mineral income by spreading the same amount of drones around on more bases. Now as to whether or not the difference is drastic enough - I think the income gains could be a bit higher. But having 55 drones on 6 bases give me more mineral income than 66 on 3 is pretty fucking awesome, and adds a dynamic that doesn't exist in HOTS, or LOTV. I think for some the concept is maybe hard to understand, I really can't think of another reason why someone would shit on the idea. Maybe players that don't like DH are typically turtle style players that are really happy with a 3 base cap? Idk. The funny thing is that DH would work just fine for them as well. I can't see a style of play that DH cripples... It just seems to open more options in the game. I still have yet to hear one person properly explain the "pitfalls" of a DH economy. So please, anyone enlighten me... ? Show nested quote +On June 20 2015 12:45 SC2John wrote:3) Just to reiterate once more, we’re not looking to make minor tweaks in this area. We’re looking for a big change that will make sure that players will spread out their expansions at a much faster rate than they do in Heart of the Swarm. As far as the Double Harvest model goes, it is designed to be as close to HotS balance as possible to prevent having a complete balance overhaul. The models are not mutually exclusive, but I understand why the development team has steered clear of testing the DH model when they already have a working model that is meeting their goals nicely. I'm confused why you didn't advocate for a joining of the two models?
I have been advocating for a fusion of both models ^^. I honestly think that the DH model (AKA breaking worker pairing while still maintaining a predictable and repeatable income curve) does nothing but improve the game in pretty much every aspect while opening up tons of strategic diversity.
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/487725-picking-up-the-dh-project#4
However, the difficulty of getting Blizzard to spend time adopting this model is more related to the fact that they already have a model that meets their goals accordingly and its simply not worth their time to recreate DH and slightly balance accordingly. This is why I believe it's up to the community to create a better version of SC2 rather than following Blizzard blindly with the idea that, "don't worry, they'll come through" like we did for 2 years with BL/infestor, and then 4 years for decent UI changes, and then 5 years for an economy that prevents hard turtling. -_-
|
On June 21 2015 00:29 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Yeah, the tragedy is that DK knew loldrops were too powerful back in HoTS beta, hence the photon overcharge, there's noway protoss can defend without it. Reverse order. Medivac speed boost was implemented partly due to Photon Overcharge making dropplay oboslete.
You're right. Dug this up:
Terran Changes
1. Redesign Thor ability/Raven seeker missile
2. Push early game Reaper a bit more
3. Hellbats better against melee units, not necessarily better vs. Ranged.
4. We'd really like to see more Medivac usage like we saw in Wings for a time in the past. Currently thinking on a cooldown based speed booster ability.
5. Buff Bio in the late game - with the addition of new units in HotS, we feel Bio in the late game is a bit weak.
6. Buff mech in general - we'd like to maybe test combining the vehicle and air upgrades at the armory.
lol, "we'd like to see more medivac usage", "we'd like to boost bio late game"... now that's all we see all day everyday from terran. Didn't he realize these changes would result in one-dimensional gameplay? He's supposed to be the lead designer right? The one that's supposed to know so much more than the community. Now he wants to boost it more!
Anyway, still doesn't change the fact that protoss would die the way loldrops are used nowadays without photon overcharge. Still doesn't change the fact that loldrops are all we see from terran against protoss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
