|
On October 26 2012 00:10 SmileZerg wrote:
Queens aren't Orbital Commands, they're mobile units that move at a decent speed on Creep. Besides, you're supposed to have one at every base, if you don't that's either your fault for playing badly, or your opponent's gain for playing well by killing them.
Also the latest iteration of the spell as I just suggested it would be cast on Drones and then they would go and morph the buildings afterwards.
Queens are "supposed" to be useful enough to make me want to have one at each base, but they are not.
A macro hatch dose the same macro job, transfuse is uses is too limited, and the new ability is not global.
Oh and just to let you know, there is no way to have a queen at a base that just finished if you keep queens at the other hatches too.
More over there is not point in having that many queens in the first place.
They are too weak for me to justifiably build more than one.
|
Too weak? It's not a combat unit, it's a macro support unit. In SC2 players regularly opened with several Queens, and so far they haven't been nerfed at all in Starbow, so I don't understand where you're coming from.
Also, Zerg is supposed to have macro Hatches. Therefore by the time you're taking a fourth base, you should have 3-4 Queens already built. If one of them wasn't at the fourth as it's coming up to connect the creep and possibly speed along the Hatch build time, again either you're playing badly or your opponent is playing well and forcing you out of position.
If Queens are "too weak" what are your suggestions for making them more integral and powerful?
|
I am saying scrap the inject all together it is a bad design, in both sc2 and starbow.
rebalanced the queen's cost/supply around creep, transfuse, and let the 3rd ability be global.
100m and 1 supply
|
On October 25 2012 21:44 SmileZerg wrote:
Eh, who cares? We gotta get something well designed first, then we can worry about the balance of it.
Ghosts have 5 (well, four energy ones plus Nuke). Queens are a macro unit, they are totally justified having four or even more abilities.
Also Morphogenesis doesn't affect the concept of Time directly like Protoss is doing with Chrono Boost. It's more like some biological method involving growth steroids or nourishing chemicals that make things mutate faster. That's why, unlike Chrono Boost, it doesn't affect research or attack speed on defensive structures. But it does allow structures to complete faster, which is something Chrono can't do (makes sense as Protoss building is actually a space manipulation mechanic so there is presumably some conflict with using space and time warping abilities on the same target if you want a lore explanation).
By the way, I suggest we use Mutagen Spray as the new name.
My question concerning inject wasn't really about matchup’s balance. It was about balance between Inject and Hatchery and between Inject and the others spells of the Queens. Even from a design stand point, it is important to take that into account if you want to make peoples use Queens (instead of making only hatcheries to produce larva) and if you want them to use all its abilities.
On Ghost, I agree with you, they have way too many spells ^^
Morphogenesis (or Mutagen Spray… I like your idea for the name) make more sense with your explanation but in the end, it is still a “chronoboost that work on building”. From a gameplay stand point, it doesn't fit with the Zerg race. Look at Chronoboost for example. Protoss are supposed to be the most advanced race that rely on strong units on low number, highly advanced technology and strong psionic ability. Chronoboost fit perfectly in this theme because it allow Protoss to get upgrades faster (to make their strong units even stronger) and to get high tech unit faster. Zergs are the opposite and use number and mobility to overcome their opponents instead of high technology. Inject fit perfectly in this theme because it allow them to make even more unit. Same for creep spread since creep is a specificity of Zergs. Now look at Morphogenesis. It can be used to get lair and tech building faster. Doesn't fit with Zerg since they are supposed to tech slower than the other races. In top of that, it would make Zergs all-in (like 2hatch muta) scarier because it give less time to your opponent to scout / react to them but it does not add any depth to Starbow. Using it on defensive structure or unit to get them faster seem a bit more interesting but it does make scouting an incoming push less important. I also think that Zergs will most of the time choose inject (for extra defensive units) over morphogenis to defend their base.
|
@Warp
I could potentially get on board with scrapping Inject, Kabel seems to be leaning that way as well.
The balance values for cost and such can be played with later, they aren't important until we get interesting spells.
I do not think a global ability would be good at all, however. As Kabel said, the fact that the Queen's spells are local helps to distinguish them from the macro mechanics of the other races. It is more unique and fitting for what is a macro unit rather than a structure, and increases the importance of positioning and creep spread. Having your Queens placed correctly around your territory and managing them as units is a skill which can separate better players from lesser ones.
|
On October 26 2012 00:33 hipo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 21:44 SmileZerg wrote:
Eh, who cares? We gotta get something well designed first, then we can worry about the balance of it.
Ghosts have 5 (well, four energy ones plus Nuke). Queens are a macro unit, they are totally justified having four or even more abilities.
Also Morphogenesis doesn't affect the concept of Time directly like Protoss is doing with Chrono Boost. It's more like some biological method involving growth steroids or nourishing chemicals that make things mutate faster. That's why, unlike Chrono Boost, it doesn't affect research or attack speed on defensive structures. But it does allow structures to complete faster, which is something Chrono can't do (makes sense as Protoss building is actually a space manipulation mechanic so there is presumably some conflict with using space and time warping abilities on the same target if you want a lore explanation).
By the way, I suggest we use Mutagen Spray as the new name.
My question concerning inject wasn't really about matchup’s balance. It was about balance between Inject and Hatchery and between Inject and the others spells of the Queens. Even from a design stand point, it is important to take that into account if you want to make peoples use Queens (instead of making only hatcheries to produce larva) and if you want them to use all its abilities.
Okay, internal balance inasmuch as making sure all of the spells have equal opportunity costs, yeah that is a good point. Hard to say until we can see them in action though.
On Ghost, I agree with you, they have way too many spells ^^
No actually I like the fact that Ghosts have a lot of spells. Only three of them are technically real spells though, Cloak is just utility and Nuke Calldown is a special case.
Morphogenesis (or Mutagen Spray… I like your idea for the name) make more sense with your explanation but in the end, it is still a “chronoboost that work on building”. From a gameplay stand point, it doesn't fit with the Zerg race. Look at Chronoboost for example. Protoss are supposed to be the most advanced race that rely on strong units on low number, highly advanced technology and strong psionic ability. Chronoboost fit perfectly in this theme because it allow Protoss to get upgrades faster (to make their strong units even stronger) and to get high tech unit faster. Zergs are the opposite and use number and mobility to overcome their opponents instead of high technology. Inject fit perfectly in this theme because it allow them to make even more unit. Same for creep spread since creep is a specificity of Zergs. Now look at Morphogenesis. It can be used to get lair and tech building faster. Doesn't fit with Zerg since they are supposed to tech slower than the other races. In top of that, it would make Zergs all-in (like 2hatch muta) scarier because it give less time to your opponent to scout / react to them but it does not add any depth to Starbow. Using it on defensive structure or unit to get them faster seem a bit more interesting but it does make scouting an incoming push less important. I also think that Zergs will most of the time choose inject (for extra defensive units) over morphogenis to defend their base.
I like this argument because you base it on the racial themes. I will accede the point that Zerg should tech slower than the other races. Perhaps limiting the spell to be only castable on units and not buildings would be alright, however that would still let Drones morph some structures more quickly, allowing Zerg to mass Crawlers or expand across the map more ferociously, which I believe is in keeping with their nature (subject to balancing of course).
I've got an alternate idea for Mutagen that would make it less like Chrono Boost and more like an additional resource for Zerg to consider. Instead of speeding up morphing, it would actually be REQUIRED for morphing, for certain structures/units. In this way you would need to decide which tech paths you wanted to take and invest Queen energy into them, allowing Zerg to either tech or mass units by using the energy for whatever our Inject/Larvae mechanic ends up being.
Lots of possibilities to think about.
|
New test patch uploaded on EU
I have changed the Queen as described here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=129#2569
Nothing major. Wanna give it a try.
I have also added a unit selection limit to Destination. You can only select 16 units. Wanna see how it works.
As if this wasn´t enough, I try Dankos mineral suggestion. 4 mineral patches have 1500 minerals and 4 have 1000 minerals per base on Match point.
|
|
|
I think that part of the issue with Zerg being 'boring' is that there is no need to decide between army and economy. When I play Z I can make BOTH, crush a push by matching and overwhelming army strength, and still have more workers and more efficient saturation on each base.
I propose that, as a balance fix that also solves the lack of thought and flanking required with Zerg units, we give Zerg army units a nerf across the board. Bad play shouldn't be rewarded just because you know how to make more drones than your opponent. There should be a choice between econ/army.
It shouldn't be a staggeringly large nerf, though. Just something that makes Zerg units less effective without proper flanking and multitask. Perhaps the most effective way to achieve this 'nerf' is to let Terran and Protoss access their tech units more quickly that make Zergling/Hydra much less effective without sick good control, like Reavers and Siege Tanks.
Reducing Barracks, Gateway, Factory, Starport, Robotics, Twilight, and Stargate build times is one potential way to do this. It could also add another dimension to one base play. I'd say shaving 10 seconds off of Gateway/Factory/Barracks/Starport and 15-20 seconds off of the Protoss tech buildings would be a good choice.
All 3 races have the tools to deal with tech rushes already, and this type of change would allow Terrans and Protoss players to get active on the map earlier on without sacrificing so much economy to the Zerg.
Notably, Prism harassment after expand and Reactor Vulture into CC builds would be slightly more effective.
Unit build times could also potentially be reduced, but I'm not sure if that's necessary or good, yet.
Sincerely, the guy who stomps everyone on NA with Zerg.
|
On an unrelated note, makmeatt is killing me. 
You can't engage mass marine with mass vulture, you use mines for map control and siege up the chokes to prevent move-outs unless he goes for drops or his own tanks with that sci vessel support.
Argh.
Argh! He engaged marine/medic/firebat with vultures instead of aggressively moving tanks up and sieging! Unsieged tanks are so bad!
|
On October 26 2012 01:51 CapnAmerica wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think that part of the issue with Zerg being 'boring' is that there is no need to decide between army and economy. When I play Z I can make BOTH, crush a push by matching and overwhelming army strength, and still have more workers and more efficient saturation on each base.
I propose that, as a balance fix that also solves the lack of thought and flanking required with Zerg units, we give Zerg army units a nerf across the board. Bad play shouldn't be rewarded just because you know how to make more drones than your opponent. There should be a choice between econ/army.
It shouldn't be a staggeringly large nerf, though. Just something that makes Zerg units less effective without proper flanking and multitask. Perhaps the most effective way to achieve this 'nerf' is to let Terran and Protoss access their tech units more quickly that make Zergling/Hydra much less effective without sick good control, like Reavers and Siege Tanks.
Reducing Barracks, Gateway, Factory, Starport, Robotics, Twilight, and Stargate build times is one potential way to do this. It could also add another dimension to one base play. I'd say shaving 10 seconds off of Gateway/Factory/Barracks/Starport and 15-20 seconds off of the Protoss tech buildings would be a good choice.
All 3 races have the tools to deal with tech rushes already, and this type of change would allow Terrans and Protoss players to get active on the map earlier on without sacrificing so much economy to the Zerg.
Notably, Prism harassment after expand and Reactor Vulture into CC builds would be slightly more effective.
Unit build times could also potentially be reduced, but I'm not sure if that's necessary or good, yet.
Sincerely, the guy who stomps everyone on NA with Zerg.
While I definitely agree with you that Zergs should still try and flank and put thought into how they engage and attack, I think that the macro aspect of Zerg still should not be as easy. The thought of just removing inject from the game scares me (without some suitable replacement), because MBS allows such easy macro by the Zerg. I guess I would not mind that you can not have more than one hatchery per hotkey, but that would throw a lot of people off and just does not quite fit in with the SC2 aspect of the mod. It is not about balance at this point, it is about the design of the difficulty, dynamism, and how interesting the race is to play.
--
As a side note, may we please get some other maps on NA? >_<
|
Yep, its about design at this point, atleast for Zerg macro. Once some good Zerg mechanics are established its time to balance it.
You got two new maps on NA yesterday? Destination and Lunar Industries?
|
On October 26 2012 03:14 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 01:51 CapnAmerica wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think that part of the issue with Zerg being 'boring' is that there is no need to decide between army and economy. When I play Z I can make BOTH, crush a push by matching and overwhelming army strength, and still have more workers and more efficient saturation on each base.
I propose that, as a balance fix that also solves the lack of thought and flanking required with Zerg units, we give Zerg army units a nerf across the board. Bad play shouldn't be rewarded just because you know how to make more drones than your opponent. There should be a choice between econ/army.
It shouldn't be a staggeringly large nerf, though. Just something that makes Zerg units less effective without proper flanking and multitask. Perhaps the most effective way to achieve this 'nerf' is to let Terran and Protoss access their tech units more quickly that make Zergling/Hydra much less effective without sick good control, like Reavers and Siege Tanks.
Reducing Barracks, Gateway, Factory, Starport, Robotics, Twilight, and Stargate build times is one potential way to do this. It could also add another dimension to one base play. I'd say shaving 10 seconds off of Gateway/Factory/Barracks/Starport and 15-20 seconds off of the Protoss tech buildings would be a good choice.
All 3 races have the tools to deal with tech rushes already, and this type of change would allow Terrans and Protoss players to get active on the map earlier on without sacrificing so much economy to the Zerg.
Notably, Prism harassment after expand and Reactor Vulture into CC builds would be slightly more effective.
Unit build times could also potentially be reduced, but I'm not sure if that's necessary or good, yet.
Sincerely, the guy who stomps everyone on NA with Zerg. While I definitely agree with you that Zergs should still try and flank and put thought into how they engage and attack, I think that the macro aspect of Zerg still should not be as easy. The thought of just removing inject from the game scares me (without some suitable replacement), because MBS allows such easy macro by the Zerg. I guess I would not mind that you can not have more than one hatchery per hotkey, but that would throw a lot of people off and just does not quite fit in with the SC2 aspect of the mod. It is not about balance at this point, it is about the design of the difficulty, dynamism, and how interesting the race is to play. -- As a side note, may we please get some other maps on NA? >_<
But Zerg is only so easy because it matters very little what you make with your larvae so long as you spend your money efficiently and make some drones. If it were more knife-edge, the race would get leaps and bounds harder and require alot more skill.
|
On October 26 2012 03:34 CapnAmerica wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 26 2012 03:14 purakushi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 01:51 CapnAmerica wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think that part of the issue with Zerg being 'boring' is that there is no need to decide between army and economy. When I play Z I can make BOTH, crush a push by matching and overwhelming army strength, and still have more workers and more efficient saturation on each base.
I propose that, as a balance fix that also solves the lack of thought and flanking required with Zerg units, we give Zerg army units a nerf across the board. Bad play shouldn't be rewarded just because you know how to make more drones than your opponent. There should be a choice between econ/army.
It shouldn't be a staggeringly large nerf, though. Just something that makes Zerg units less effective without proper flanking and multitask. Perhaps the most effective way to achieve this 'nerf' is to let Terran and Protoss access their tech units more quickly that make Zergling/Hydra much less effective without sick good control, like Reavers and Siege Tanks.
Reducing Barracks, Gateway, Factory, Starport, Robotics, Twilight, and Stargate build times is one potential way to do this. It could also add another dimension to one base play. I'd say shaving 10 seconds off of Gateway/Factory/Barracks/Starport and 15-20 seconds off of the Protoss tech buildings would be a good choice.
All 3 races have the tools to deal with tech rushes already, and this type of change would allow Terrans and Protoss players to get active on the map earlier on without sacrificing so much economy to the Zerg.
Notably, Prism harassment after expand and Reactor Vulture into CC builds would be slightly more effective.
Unit build times could also potentially be reduced, but I'm not sure if that's necessary or good, yet.
Sincerely, the guy who stomps everyone on NA with Zerg. While I definitely agree with you that Zergs should still try and flank and put thought into how they engage and attack, I think that the macro aspect of Zerg still should not be as easy. The thought of just removing inject from the game scares me (without some suitable replacement), because MBS allows such easy macro by the Zerg. I guess I would not mind that you can not have more than one hatchery per hotkey, but that would throw a lot of people off and just does not quite fit in with the SC2 aspect of the mod. It is not about balance at this point, it is about the design of the difficulty, dynamism, and how interesting the race is to play. -- As a side note, may we please get some other maps on NA? >_< But Zerg is only so easy because it matters very little what you make with your larvae so long as you spend your money efficiently and make some drones. If it were more knife-edge, the race would get leaps and bounds harder and require alot more skill.
Well, that is part of the reason, but Zerg is so easy because you do not have to camera back to your base and making units is so quick. One hotkey, one rally. Decision making is one thing, but the things you can do at some moment of time is another.
Terran and Protoss need to scan, drop SCVs, chronoboost, and have different buildings. Basically, the amount of mechanics required for Terran and Protoss is far greater than Zerg's. Even if Terran and Protoss were stomping Zergs right now, this is not good design.
|
On October 26 2012 03:23 Kabel wrote:
Yep, its about design at this point, atleast for Zerg macro. Once some good Zerg mechanics are established its time to balance it.
You got two new maps on NA yesterday? Destination and Lunar Industries?
Hm, I guess decemberscalm has yet to upload them. We are still with only Match Point, Breaking Point, Sacred Sands, and Oakshire. No big, I am sure he will get to it when he has time.
|
Maps uploaded on NA 
|
|
|
This is not a very stable stream
edit: switched program
|
Destination
I like the map; however, I think that the natural for both spawns needs to be larger. In BW, the naturals are considerably larger; there is actually space to build and have units between the mining facility and bridges bridges. It feels extremely cramped on the Starbow version. Just a thought.
|
On October 26 2012 10:33 purakushi wrote:
Destination
I like the map; however, I think that the natural for both spawns needs to be larger. In BW, the naturals are considerably larger; there is actually space to build and have units between the mining facility and bridges bridges. It feels extremely cramped on the Starbow version. Just a thought.
I agree. The natural defiantly feels too small.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
