EPT[A] Starbow - Page 152
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
The changes during the the last month have mostly revolved around the design for Zerg. Fill the empty slots in the race. Personally I am quite pleased with the design of Zerg, as it is now. As I have said earlier, there are only a few areas left to design with the races, before the balance work can truly begin. Stuff left to design: - Broodlords (shall they shoot broodlings or not?) - Protoss spells (Recall on Arbiter? Remake Void Shell? Add BW-Hallucination to High Templar, etc) - Reaver shoot ground only.. if I can find a way to fix that >.< - Maybe rearrange Terran air units? - Maybe replace Energize and Auto-turret Thats all I can think of right now. There are also a couple of big balance issues to solve: - How good shall Immortals be? - Banelings too good? - The way Zerglings are now.. revert it? - Reaver & Warp Prism - Protoss vs Zerg air.. (I see lot of games where P die from mass mutalisks..) - Is the Zerg economic development balanced, compare to P and T? Then I need to identify what is true balance problems and what is "player - problems." What can the meta-game solve etc | ||
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
- Broodlords (shall they shoot broodlings or not?) -Smaller, cheaper, faster. Guardians with debuff placer spawning broodling upon death ^^. - Maybe rearrange Terran air units? No. Just tweak. - How good shall Immortals be? Remove them :D. - Banelings too good? Dunno. Remove them :D. - The way Zerglings are now.. revert it? Definitly. - Reaver & Warp Prism Reaver only lacks good mechanic with its projectile :/. Warp prism should have durability reduced imho. They are fastest transport. Allow you to warp in units everywhere and have great synergy with HTs and Reavers and zealot (as bombs). They are much more durable than in broodwar and have much more utility due to warp mechanic. There is absolutely no reason for them to be so durable. Hp nerf wont hurt their utility but will force tosses to be more careful with them. - Protoss vs Zerg air.. (I see lot of games where P die from mass mutalisks..) Cause of way tosses are playing now. There are tools already. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
| ||
|
Traceback
United States469 Posts
On November 13 2012 01:06 Laertes wrote: Why the fuck would we remove the immortal and the baneling...Please stop suggesting the removal of units INTEGRAL TO THE DESIGN OF STARBOW JUST CAUSE THEY ARE SC2 UNITS IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AND MAKES ME SOOOOOO ANGRY, PLEASE JUST DONT DO IT ANYMORE OKAY? That's like saying the warhound was integral to terran strategy in hots. If the unit is designed poorly, it can be removed. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
On November 13 2012 02:05 Laertes wrote: But the immortal and the baneling are not designed poorly, at least not in my opinion. That's your opinion, and that was his opinion, no need to turn caps on. On November 13 2012 02:05 Laertes wrote: They are in Danko's opinion, and maybe in yours, but it doesn't mean anything, A unit can be anything honestly, removing these units is just removing those options from players just because they are not balanced atm...that's really a stupid idea. Immortal is not imbalanced, immortal is badly designed. In vanilla, it was supposed to be a 1a unit used against mech. Here, it's supposed to be a slow high damage dealer, used to break siege lines and force high dps units on the field. We have other units that do those things pretty well on their own, especially once Recall makes a comeback. I abuse the shit out of the word 'design', don't I now. Whatever unit doesn't support any specific, complex interaction is a bad design in terms of Starcraft, and I'm pretty sure that's not just my opinion. | ||
|
vrumFondel
Russian Federation42 Posts
It would be great if Kabel or some good players publish here some replays with interesting games or with games where all can see proper execution of strats!! | ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
On November 13 2012 02:25 vrumFondel wrote: People!! It would be great if Kabel or some good players publish here some replays with interesting games or with games where all can see proper execution of strats!! Hi Fondel! That would help a lot, good analysis material usually comes from the top. | ||
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
removing these units is just removing those options from players just because they are not balanced atm Yes, im whining about balance. Balance is most important thing now. Design can come later. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
@Immortal They can be dealt with pretty easily, my problem is that they counter an entire tech tree single handedly. One emp and they get insta killed by tanks. A few stim marines and they melt like paper. On the other hand, these guys with zealot support wreck set up mech positions. Its a free army if T is caught off gaurd, no questions asked. What I'd like to see is a better degree of soft counter in this area. In BW, dragoons didn't just hard counter mech, they fought and won with micro. Vultures could actually be used to kill goons (not the case at all with stalkers and immortal, only vs zealot). Thats mainly a spider mine issue. Is hardened shields really a good thing? Even with the higher threshold. @Banes I've never seen them be a problem in all of my games. They are so slow off creep, how on earth are they a threat? I've only seen them being mixed a few mid game vs bio T (supplement to lurkers), but mainly lurkers are the anti bio. Vs P it can force a few stalkers which is nice I guess. They also make ZvZ a pretty good MU early on. | ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
The immortal might be a well designed unit for its purpose, but its purpose doesn't fit in the game we want. If you want to see pvt like in broodwar (which i think everyone here wants?), you cannot have a unit that's is made to a-move into a sieged up terran and be cost-efficient. Main dps of mech terran vs ground is spider mines and siege tank which get hard countered by hardened shields... | ||
|
JohnnyZerg
Italy378 Posts
| ||
|
Traceback
United States469 Posts
Immortals, though, are virtually unmicroable. The closest thing to micro is target firing and prism drop, which is stupidly good when combined with zealots and blinks onto tanks. The unit itself is a bland tank unit surprisingly similar to mini thors without AA. They are a very bland tankey a move unit. Pure tank units are a bad design unless they are used as lategame game enders (aka BC, Brood, Ultra, Carrier). A-move tank units such as thors, immortals, and even things like marauders, and warhounds, are not fun to watch when compared to their alternatives. The immortal is designed as an anti-armor tank unit. With the removal of the roach the immortals role in PvZ is basically anti-lurker. This is much more excitingly fufiled by the reaver which has more vesitility. In PvT immortals are hard counter units to the only viable mid game terran composition. This combined with the fact that they are just plain boring is a sure sign of a design flaw. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Stalkers are weaker than Dragoons but more mobile. Immortals are stronger than Dragoons but slower and more expensive. In current PvT, Stalkers on their own seems very strong vs T. Almost as strong as Dragoons :O When the Immortal is added to the fight, P gets a really strong advantage. Since P in Starbow is soooo much more mobile than in BW, Terran need to gain an edge in their fighting units. There shall be no doubt that a sieged Terran army is stronger than a P army. Right now they seem even, and P has less work to do in combat. A-move favours P. (For the most part) I think the concept of a Stalker and Immortal is more interesting than a Dragoon. So what can we do with Immortals? - Make them require more micro in combat and less A-move.. - Make them EITHER damage dealers or tanky units.. How can this be done? Make Immortals a rare unit in combat? They are expensive but strong? | ||
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3301 Posts
Make immortals have a pretty harsh movement (and/or attack) speed nerf for a few seconds after they have to use their hardened shield because they got hit. Basically, as a result of using hardened shield, they move slower (i.e. like under the effects of a marauder's concussive shell). If they are just down to HP, they move normally. Another idea: make each shot use shield. It can deal different amounts of damage depending on how much shields it has remaining (think tiers, perhaps), as well as have a minimum amount of damage it can do (i.e. for instances where it has no shields). This makes each shot a lot more important. You do not want to be wasting shots on non-armoured units, for example. However, If you still want to just use the immortal to tank damage, feel free to just move it into the opposing army before the rest of your army.  Also, lol @ above. | ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
On November 13 2012 02:45 Danko__ wrote: Yes, im whining about balance. Balance is most important thing now. Design can come later. I don't agree with this. I feel design should always come first and then the game will balance itself out from there by the players as long as the races themselves are well designed and give the players options. That being said, the immortal is a boring unit. I know nothing about the current balance of Starbow but I know all about how boring the immortal is. Designwise, I'd say remove/replace it. Remember, the Immortal was pretty much designed to be boring. It was designed to be tanky and slow, which means it's an A-move unit. Unless you want to completely change the way the unit works, I'd say scrap it. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Even better, make the on switch start draining shield so it has to be used carefully. | ||
| ||
