|
On November 17 2012 15:38 Von wrote:
SC2 Broodwar has been done. If you guys can't come up with more creative solutions than bringing back brood units .. well ..
What's the point?
He doesn't bring back brood war units per se? A lot of the units are his own invention, he also changes the resource model a bit? He just combines the elements he likes of BW and WoL and adds his own?
Not that I think this project is going to lead to good games, just as I think SC2BW most likely won't. Copying BW in SC2's pathing engine is just not ever going to work.
|
On November 17 2012 17:54 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2012 15:38 Von wrote:
SC2 Broodwar has been done. If you guys can't come up with more creative solutions than bringing back brood units .. well ..
What's the point?
He doesn't bring back brood war units per se? A lot of the units are his own invention, he also changes the resource model a bit? He just combines the elements he likes of BW and WoL and adds his own? Not that I think this project is going to lead to good games, just as I think SC2BW most likely won't. Copying BW in SC2's pathing engine is just not ever going to work.
It's not copying the old into the new engine, it's more of picking the units, both BW and SC2 alike, whose roles in the game complement each other, and then adjusting them to fit into the game. It's still a designing phase and really, if you only expected new stuff to only be introduced, you are in for a disappointment, just as it is with any other game in its development stages. We want this mod to be playable, interesting, thrilling, pumping with action and emotions, and knowing BW has provided us with all that, we're keen on trying out the old ideas in our new environment. Would be nice if everyone realized we're operating on hypotheses and nobody's claiming their idea will definitely work.
|
I will get a new patch up today. I have some more things to fix first. Maybe it will be up 6-8 hours from now.
@Decemberscalm
Good post. As the development of Starbow progresses I do indeed aim for the goals - make deathballs be a less effective formation to keep your army, make position matter, make defenders able to control area etc.
The maps do play a huge role for this. I still do not think we have optimal maps for Starbow. And as always, if anyone is eager to create a melee map for Starbow.. please do!
Moving shot has been added to some units. I have looked at the SC2BW mod for references. Any particular units you think about?
But I am not sure what problems you are refereing to with Z? From what I have seen on EU Z seems to be doing ok on most maps.
Ps. Nice cast!
@JohnMadden
Well said!
@Immortal, Stalkers and Dragoons
What are the problems with the Immortal?
- It has a very narrow use vs armored ground units only. Its not cost effective vs other ground units.
- The hardened shield is very very hard to balance and fit into the game.
- It is a plain unit that is not so rewarded by micro. It is almost at the top of its efficency when P a-moves with it.
- It overlaps with other things P can already do:
The Archon can tank damage as well as Immortals do vs T. It also is a viable target for EMP.
The Reaver and Dark Templar is as high damage dealer as the Immortals vs armored
The Hardened Shied makes the following P stuff unnecessary to use when breaking a T siege line:
- Void Shell
- Hallucination from BW (Which will be added in this patch)
- Vortex and Mass Recall on Arbiter (Which will also be added in this patch)
- Lift off by Corsairs on enemy siege tanks
- Run into enemy tank lines with speed-Zealots to absorb damage..
Instead the Immortal can A-move... Despite the shield only reduces 20 dmg. P must not use any of the fun tricks above. In fact, I have almost never seen a P player NEED to use Vortex or Void Shell to break Terran siege lines. Sometimes they try it cause its cool.
I have experimented today and yesterday with different variations of the Immortal shield, as suggested by people in this thread. But it just changes the form of the problem, it does not solve it! So MAYBE the Immortal will be removed. Unless we change perspective on the Immortal...
Many players want me to have both Dragoon and Stalker in the game. One mobile weaker unit, one stronger slower unit. I like that dynamic too. In fact, the Immortal and Stalker represent that dynamic. It must just be tuned!
One way to go can be to shift some of the combat power from the Stalker to the Immortal..
- Instead Stalkers strength will be their mobility, can warp in, blink, anti air etc.
- Instead the Immortal will be a strong combat unit in all match ups.
In terms of resources, Immortals can have more cost efficient DPS and HP compared to Stalkers.. While Stalkers warp in, can blink, are fast, can shoot anti air etc..
Right now Stalkers are fast, strong, tough and have good dps. They can do everything!
The Immortal is a pure anti-armored unit that is added in a few situations of the game or when the opponent shall be humiliated..
Before I write my own novel about it, I will throw the question out here:
Imagine that the Dragoon and the Stalker were in the game. What would the Dragoon and Stalker do and be like, to seperate them from each other but still let both units have their own unique role in the Protoss race?
|
On November 17 2012 18:38 JohnMadden wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2012 17:54 SiskosGoatee wrote:On November 17 2012 15:38 Von wrote:
SC2 Broodwar has been done. If you guys can't come up with more creative solutions than bringing back brood units .. well ..
What's the point?
He doesn't bring back brood war units per se? A lot of the units are his own invention, he also changes the resource model a bit? He just combines the elements he likes of BW and WoL and adds his own? Not that I think this project is going to lead to good games, just as I think SC2BW most likely won't. Copying BW in SC2's pathing engine is just not ever going to work. It's not copying the old into the new engine, it's more of picking the units, both BW and SC2 alike, whose roles in the game complement each other, and then adjusting them to fit into the game. It's still a designing phase and really, if you only expected new stuff to only be introduced, you are in for a disappointment, just as it is with any other game in its development stages. We want this mod to be playable, interesting, thrilling, pumping with action and emotions, and knowing BW has provided us with all that, we're keen on trying out the old ideas in our new environment. Would be nice if everyone realized we're operating on hypotheses and nobody's claiming their idea will definitely work. Well, I'm going to say just adding 'the cool units' from BW and WoL together isn't going to work and is an underexpression of the complexity of designing an RTS. What made these units cool? Let's consider the reaver, the epitome of cool right?
So what makes it cool? Well, reaver/shuttle of course, a-moving reavers is distinctly un-cool. So? What makes reaver/shuttle possible at all? The fact that in BW there was a destinct timing window where T basically had barely any anti air. This is not per se going to happen in starbow at all. The reason T could afford to do that is because while reaver/shuttle is annoying, ti can't actually kill you, and the only realistic flying unit that can hit ground except the scout which is terrible is the carrier, which is such high tech that goliaths will be out in time. Basically, if you have a void ray, T cannot afford to do that any more or void ray builds would kill them, so reaver/shuttle as an exponent of that is dead.
Same thing with the carrier, people often talk about buffing the carrier in some BW way. But one has to realize in BW carriers are really only used in PvT. Why? Well, the bulk of the powerful TvP mech army is siege tanks, which don't shoot air. In WoL with the existence of the immortal, the bulk of the TvP army is the marine. Marines hit air. Furtheremore, no matter how much you buff the carrier, is it really going to be better against marines than a colossus? Probably not, in fact, it probably should never be better against marines than a colossus or everyone would go mass carrier because it would counter everything, dealing splash to air and ground. So no matter how much BW micro you add to the carrier, people are still not ever going to make it in lieu of colossi.
These are the very intricate interactions of the game, which were never ever ever 'designed' by Blizzard, you can't foresee all this, they just made a couple of units which they thought were cool. Some were used, some weren't really. Why isn't the scout used? It's not even that bad, you just never see BC's against protoss because they would probably be mind controlled anyway.
You just can't port units over and expect them to be used in a similar way, and the existence of such cool interactions are reaver/shuttle were never 'designed' by Blizzard, it just magicaly went in that direction. Which is the only real 'design' they gave the game, they made a bunch of specialized units with great potential to do things and great weaknesses for infinite diversity in infinite combinations to let players make these strategies, not Blizzard itself.
|
@SiskosGoatee
I, and many who participates in the playtesting and the discussion about development, enjoys creating this MOD. We want to see how an alternative version of Starcraft 2 can look like.. We try to go in depth with the problems and understand the game.. What works and what does not.. and why.. It is indeed a complex problem to create, or in this case, recreate a RTS. Will it ever be good? I do not know. But I atleast enjoy the process of creating this.
Please try to understand what we are doing before you come here and assume that this is just about combining cool stuff from BW and SC2 without any considerations to their context. Feel free to participate in the discussion about development instead.
|
Well, what I'm trying to say is? Why throw in so many BW units? Why not just go all out and create your own units?
|
why not? many of the bw units are well designed, i don't see why you shouldn't use them
|
because BW was a pretty good game, with good unit interaction.
starcraft 2 is pretty good too but not that great design..
some of the flaws i believe are covered by the units in bw since they were designed for the purpose..
I believe blizzard wanted to make a fast paced game so they kinda ditched the whole area control things, i think someone said before, there are units only designed to be a-moved into a ball of enemy units..
we are bringing the fun back into the game 
|
the dragoon and the stalker really would overlap, theres barely a difference between two. Everyone will just take the dragoon over the stalker unless the stalker starts with blink and has some kind of big buff.
Where would you even put both of them? the gateway? both need cybercore? Honestly just pick one or the other and go from there.
|
On November 17 2012 20:45 Caas wrote:because BW was a pretty good game, with good unit interaction. starcraft 2 is pretty good too but not that great design.. some of the flaws i believe are covered by the units in bw since they were designed for the purpose.. I believe blizzard wanted to make a fast paced game so they kinda ditched the whole area control things, i think someone said before, there are units only designed to be a-moved into a ball of enemy units.. we are bringing the fun back into the game Well, that's fine, but you might want to read the original wall of text I made about it which explains why the 'good unit interaction' or 'good units' from BW are basically going to be completely different units once you port them into a different game. Which is what I'm saying, what makes a unit good is not the unit itself, it's the units around that unit.
|
@SiskosGoatee
I understand its hard to know anything about the development process if you are new to this thread. The opening post is also missleading regarding the current content in the game.
When I started this project I did indeed create lots of my own units and spells. Some were nice.. some were.. not nice :p
Since my goal is to recreate SC2 as a sequel to BW, I have to stay true to the Starcraft universe. I aim to mainly use things from both games. When necessary, I make own stuff. So the current state of the game is not units just thrown together. The first version of this MOD looked a lot different. But during development, units have been added and removed for lots of reasons, depending on the context. I can not create a complete meta-game. Its up to the players to explore it. I aim to create a good foundation for the game. And its still much work left to do.
Feel free to join us in the Starbow chat channel on EU or NA, if you wanna play or observe some games.
@Immortal
The previous post where I mention what I think are the problems with the current SC2 Immortal:
+ Show Spoiler +
This is just an example of how the Immortal can look like instead.
+ Show Spoiler +
Cost 150/100
HP 200
Shield 100
Damage:
20 vs light
30 vs all
40 vs armored
No special abilitiy/shield.
Ok, whats the point?
Since the Immortal will be cheaper and weaker compared to SC2, it will become more of a "core-unit" rather than a special unit. It will bring HP and firepower in all match-ups. At the same time, Stalkers will gain less DPS, to further seperate the two units role in the Protoss race.
- Stalkers can be warped in, Blink, move fast, anti air, can do hit and run attacks. But they are fragile and have weak DPS.
- Immortals have high HP and deal good damage. They can not shoot air, can not warp in and are slow. (Slows down the army that must wait for them..)
PvP
Without the Immortal we get this relationship in the core units: Stalkers > Stalkers > Zealots. (Until speed is resarched)
Mass stalkers will be the way to go.
With the new Immortal we get this relationship instead: Immortal > Stalker > Zealots > Immortal.
The composition will be more interesting. P need a combinaton of basic units.. Not too many from only one unit type.. Mass stalkers will die from Immortals. Mass Immortals will not be cost efficent vs mass Zealots, etc
PvZ:
Immortal will take a role similar to the Dragoon did in BW.
It will be good vs lurkers and ultralisks. Still it will deal good dmg vs hydras but will be weak vs Zerglings.
Again, this might lead to more intersting unit compositions.
Only mass stalkers vs Z will be weaker.
Mass Immortals only will die from Zerglings or Mutalisks..
Mass Zealots will die from lurkers..
A combination of these units might be optimal.
PvT:
Right now in Starbow, Stalkers are good vs both Tanks, Vultures and Bio. If Stalkers recieves a nerf, they will be worse vs vulture + tanks. Instead P can use Immortals as "main" unit in the army, if he chooses to invest in it.. Maybe similar to Dragoons in BW.. They will not break siege lines by themselfes. They will just be more cost efficent vs mech compared to Stalkers. But if T goes for bio or air, Immortals need the support of Stalkers, or to snipe spider mines better..
...
Yea yea you all get the point. Obviously Starcraft is not only rock-scissor-paper where everything is about building the right unit counters. But at the same time, that concept plays an important role in Starcraft. Mainly, units are more cost efficent vs certain types of units. Immortals will not be an auto-counter to anything without the shield. And thats an important different between this "new" Immortal and the SC2 Immortal.
They will be cost efficent vs medium and armored targets. But P sacrifices mobility for this..
They will be cost efficent when it comes to absorb damage, due to high HP. But P sacficies mobility for this too..
They will NOT be efficent vs small units or air units.. or to harass or react to harasses.. So P can not ONLY build Immortals..
And thats a key thing in Starcraft. No race should be able to only build 1 unit type to win the game. Instead different units serves different purposes. And this might be a way to give the Immortal a purpose in Starbow.
Potential problems:
- The micro aspect of Immortals is mainly WHAT to shoot on, due to damage bonus vs certain targets. Every unit in the game must not have fancy micro abilities. But I think its important that all units can increase in efficency with micro, to some degree atleast. Slow units have not as much micro potential as faster units.
- The name Immortal does not make sense anymore.. :p
Thoughts?!
|
Removing hardened shield and changing immortal/stalker to be core units might be a great idea, but the immortal still needs something to make it stand out.
Zealots have speed - Stalkers have range and blink, what does Immortals have?
Adding some kind of simple micro upgrade (range on dragoons and speed on zealots from BW were micro upgrades more than damage upgrades - the same goes for blink), to robo bay or twilight council should be considered.
But what should an Immortal upgrade do?
Extra mobility - not good on such a slow powerhouse.
Extra range - maybe, but kinda stupid with stalker range in existance too.
Extra armor/hp/tankiness - will make it have the same function as now.
Pure damage ability - might work, but needs to be thought out well to not make it OP against tanks or lurkers.
|
uh, i like it, BUT, dealing with muta's is already hard as it is in pvz, nerfing the stalker dps and health will make it even harder to defend from them. Either give the stalker a bonus versus light or slightly buff the corsair (atm mutas are faster than them, so they cannot deal with mass muta, so maybe a little speed buff?).
Just call em dragoons i guess? 
|
|
|
@Zaphod
I agree that the Immortal could need a little twist to make it more unique. Like the dot over i. Hm.. IF this Immortal is added to the game, maybe something more can be added later, if needed. An upgrade or something else..
@Solid
I am not sure what causes Mutas to be imbalanced in ZvP, as I often hear. I do not play P so often, but P players tell me that they can not stop Mutas. Still P seems to have the right tools to do it:
- Stalkers have more HP and DPS in Starbow.
- Corsairs have same speed as Mutas and deal splash damage, (Corsairs even have a speed upgrade!)
- Archons have larger splash radius.
- Cannons can be chrono boosted to attack faser.
- Psi storm are stronger.
- In fact, Mutalisks have slower attack speed in Starbow! I added that to make Mutas be more of a hit-and-run unit and not as effective in direct fights.
So maybe a nerf to Stalkers would make it even harder. But I think that can be compensated in other ways.
@JohnnyZerg
Yes, Corsairs can lift the tank, even if its sieged or unsieged.
|
Btw, would anyone like to help me with a thing in the editor?
For some reason, Recall is not teleporting units to the caster. Units are teleported away and returns to the spot they just stood on... I have looked at original Recall in SC2 editor and everything looks fine..
If someone wanna help me, please PM me and I send you the MOD file so you can look,
(This version is not uploaded yet since it is the patch I am working on. And when this thing works I can finally upload it >.<)
|
On November 17 2012 22:06 Kabel wrote:
Btw, would anyone like to help me with a thing in the editor?
For some reason, Recall is not teleporting units to the caster. Units are teleported away and returns to the spot they just stood on... I have looked at original Recall in SC2 editor and everything looks fine..
If someone wanna help me, please PM me and I send you the MOD file so you can look,
(This version is not uploaded yet since it is the patch I am working on. )
Between prisms, warpgate, blinkers and recall ability nexus, I think the protoss does not need another mobility.
Recall an arbiter units ability to me is perfect (do not judge the bad things that are not used, you have to judge a thing that does not work only if you try several times and no results). I would hate if it were removed the recall of a single unit to the arbiter, because it has a lot of potential.
@vortex
modify vortex so that once sucked units close to it, the other units that are not being sucked in against. The real benefit is that once finished VOLTEX, lurkers and tanks are brought in mobile mode and thus lost their offensive value
|
Teleport 1 unit to the Arbiter is ok. But mass-recall opens up more possibilities and is more breathtaking. "Zomg look at dat recall!1!!1!!!21111"
- Recall into enemy bases
- Reposition your army at an other location on the map
- Recall on top of enemy siege tanks
I know thats not necessary to do know since P is so strong vs T mech anyways. But I aim to strengthen T in sieged up positions which forces P to use other methods to break siege lines:
- Hallucinations
- Void Shell
- Zealot drops
- Recall
Since Stalkers might get a nerf they will be less effective vs tanks. If so, Blink on top of enemy tanks will not be as good. Maybe to force friendly fire from tanks splash damage.
|
On November 17 2012 21:10 Kabel wrote:
Without the Immortal we get this relationship in the core units: Stalkers > Stalkers > Zealots. (Until speed is resarched)
Mass stalkers will be the way to go.
With the new Immortal we get this relationship instead: Immortal > Stalker > Zealots > Immortal.
The composition will be more interesting. P need a combinaton of basic units.. Not too many from only one unit type.. Mass stalkers will die from Immortals. Mass Immortals will not be cost efficent vs mass Zealots, etc
First order of business: stop thinking solely in terms of unit compositions or basing any of your decisions on such conclusions. This is not SC2 and as SiskosGoatee has said a few times already, what should interest you are interactions - not merely what counters what, but how does it do that. Immortal-stalker-zealot relationship you mentioned is based on numbers only.
Second order of business, one has to go, either recall or blink. Either you give P an end-game ability to immediately drop large masses of units anywhere on the map or you let him have an enormous control over any mid-game battle.
|
On November 17 2012 22:50 JohnMadden wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2012 21:10 Kabel wrote:
Without the Immortal we get this relationship in the core units: Stalkers > Stalkers > Zealots. (Until speed is resarched)
Mass stalkers will be the way to go.
With the new Immortal we get this relationship instead: Immortal > Stalker > Zealots > Immortal.
The composition will be more interesting. P need a combinaton of basic units.. Not too many from only one unit type.. Mass stalkers will die from Immortals. Mass Immortals will not be cost efficent vs mass Zealots, etc First order of business: stop thinking solely in terms of unit compositions or basing any of your decisions on such conclusions. This is not SC2 and as SiskosGoatee has said a few times already, what should interest you are interactions - not merely what counters what, but how does it do that. Immortal-stalker-zealot relationship you mentioned is based on numbers only. Second order of business, one has to go, either recall or blink. Either you give P an end-game ability to immediately drop large masses of units anywhere on the map or you let him have an enormous control over any mid-game battle. Honestly, as I said, I think the problem is forcing a certain metagame, it just won't work, the game is too complete for that. You create a couple of units which you think are cool and palyers will develop their own metagame which you couldn't have ever anticipated. The strategies of both WoL and BW aren't 'designed', they are just evolved over time.
Kabel seems to try to tweak unit stats in the hope that palyers are going to use units in a certain way, a game such as this is too complicated to anticipate it, so just make cool units and see what happens. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
