|
On February 21 2013 00:09 JohnnyZerg wrote:Show nested quote + So I thought of perhaps giving it a passive ability with increased movement speed (like 25%) in a small area around the unit. This ability, promote the death ball, kabel want to avoid this. I think we should make the mech less strong in positioning and more strong while mobile. In exchange must nerf the radius of stasis and the amount of units. If make units pushability (by marverk mod), maybe is necessary balanced all spash damage ability.
Ehh? In the same post I explained why it didn't promote deathball play as the ability doesn't scale well unless you have great unit control. Remember the AOE of the passive ability isn't that big which makes it very difficult to use in a deathball.
Rather it simply gives the toss player better opportunities to attack where the opponent isn't.
Instead, I believe the deathball syndrom occurs when a player is incentivized to keep his main army together (not neccesarily packed closely together though). This happens with the arbiter and the carrier. Both players are incentivized to have all their units in position X (rather than spread out over several locations). The terran player needs to bring all his units to defend against the "overpowered" stasis, and you need to have all your units together as well to defend against carriers.
There is nothing wrong with this kind of gameplay in it self as long as the battles are microintensive and entertaining. As you know, I don't think stasis battles are entertaining as it doesn't give the terran player an opportunity to remicro against stasis after it has been casted. Carriers on the other hand are fine and creates a somewhat interesting gameplay.
However, I would prefer that protoss's had a 3rd option where they could outmutltitask a maxed out terran player on 5 bases in the late game. To do that, they need some kind of mobility buff which I believe this passive ability could give them.
Btw, could you please reduce the hit points on the rocks on neo requirem. I don't think it is realistic that one can kill the rocks when they have 2k life.
|
|
|
|
|
On February 21 2013 02:14 Laertes wrote:
I'm thinking about what you said, but I don't think that stasis is broken. If we are jumping into a world of theoretical discussion, then we have to stay on the lines of theory. Theoretically, Arbiters are not broken. Arbiters are high tech units which RELY ON OTHER UNITS TO BE EFFECTIVE.
This is important. Why is it important? It is important because that is the arbiter's thing. It only enhances other units, it is not a threat on it's own.
Theoretically Science Vessels are not broken. Science Vessels are also high tech unit but their role is decreasing the effectiveness of other units. Science Vessels can function alone and can be very deadly versus arbiters for example.
Science Vessels are already a standard addition to a meching terran. If you spot the stargates, you should start pumping vessels with one of the spells researched. You should prepare with spare minerals to have both upgrades imo since one or two tanks isn't going to hurt, it's more important the tanks you have don't die.
Now, while the fight is science vessel versus arbiters, it's little more interesting because the skillset is judgement. Does the opponent have too much energy? Can I exhaust his energy or distract him from his arbs while I EMP? Even questions like, can I damage his economy so he can't make his arbiters more effective. In the first vod chronopolis destroyed you by a thread. He had a better economy and that's why he won. Not because Arbiters are OP.
This stuff matters and can be fun to watch. I think that this is legitimate. We shoudn't be so quick to change things that may not need to be changed.
You are thinking about my arguments, but are you sure you fully understand them? I already explained why I think science vessel vs arbiters is not a great matchup from a design perspective. Maybe you disagree and that is fine, but you didn't really respond to my actual arguments.
You say arbiters is not a broken unit, but I have already stated that they create scenarios where everything is decided in one second (science vessel vs arbiters). Sure this is skill based, but it is also skill based to play vortex vs fungal vs emp or w/e stupid matchups WOL had, but that didn't create interesting games.
Everything that doesn't give players a remicro option after the ability has been casted is (IMO) a flawed design ability to a various degree. In theory EMP is flawed as well, however, it is much much less severe than arbiters as the mech'ing player just can't go punish the toss player after having landed a great emp as his army is much less mobile.
Also please stop arguing about that VOD with chronopolis, I haven't even mentioned that specific games as it is completely irrelevant. Design discussions can be had on a theoretical level, though balance discussions likely requires actually testing. However, I have played over 10 games since then against arbiters against various player and lost them all. Many of the games I had roughly an equal economy to -200 average ressource collection which is very standard against a toss, as the toss is suppoed to have better economy (since starports openings aren't viable after having fast expanded due to the threat of warp gate allins, which means you can't put pressure in the early midgame as a terran player).
But no these games doesn't matter for my arguments. This is a design complaint primarily, not a balance complaint.
The only way to defend the current version of stasis is if you believe in one of the following "design theories".
1) Games decided in 1 seconds are entertaining.
2) You think terrans massing turrets eveyrwhere and not attacking for the first 40 minutes (or so) creates interesting games (compard to just a few turrets at key locations)
3) You don't think stasis punishes a terran player particularly hard, and you do believe he has great counteroptions after stasis has been casted.
4) You believe the terran is supposed to be able to manually position every single tank at multiple locations all the time.
Personally I think neither of these above 4 design theories are great. I think WOL had too much of it, and I believe starbow has much less of it. Stasis is probably the only poorly designed ability left in the game, and unless you truly believe one of these 4 theories creates entertaining games, then it is only (irrational) BW nostalagia which can explain keeping the current version in the game.
Regarding arbiters entranching other units; My suggestion will give it the same role and allow it to be used to conquer positions for a short while from a mech'ing terran. However, the damage will be less severe, and instead the energy cost will be reduced to compensate. I believe this will make it better designed, and the exact stats can be tweaked to make it balanced.
|
|
|
On February 21 2013 02:25 Laertes wrote:
Xiphias please make another recap but this time add an educational touch. Discuss the Build Orders and strategies behind the people who were playing.
I will probably cast more games and to more day[9]'ish stuff. This was probably (95%) the first and last recap I'll ever make since it took forever (12 hours just to render it).
I agree with HideRDK about Arbiter btw. Stasis is kinda boring and could be twicked in some direction for more exiting gameplay. Trying out his suggetion would be nice. On the other hand, I never play TvP so my opinion has not too much substance to it.
|
Show nested quote +If you are defending then you can easly presplit your tanks. Stacking 5 of them in one place is quite bad and quite easy to avoid at any level of play when defending (unless aoe is really broken). Its just mistake which can be easly avoided once we will have more experience. So you have 10 tanks and split 5 of them into two groups. This is quite normal, and splitting them into 4+ groups is an almost impossible tanks when you have you your army in many different places at once. This definitely isn't easily avoidable.
Getting 5 tanks + some goliaths statised in one statis is basically usage of 100% potential of statis. How many units it can freeze? Last time i checked it was 8. Either, aoe is broken, as it should punish stacking units, or you are stacking these units.
Show nested quote +You can reinforce with your more mobile forces with different routes. You are supposed to have lots of turrets lategame (with insane range). You dont need to move all your other tanks. Just fly in with vessels, emp, bring vultures and snipe zealots, or at least bate them out/kill some before tanks unfreeze.
If you actually can afford mass turrets (compared to just some turrets) either 1) The game/map is badly designed as turtle play is too easy (blue storm or w/e it is called is one example of that), or 2) the toss has failed and hasn't harassed/army traded enough. On most maps there is no way a terran should be able to afford more than a couple of turrets here and there, and rightly so, because ultra turtle play creates boring games.
Turrets are cheap. And you are supposed to have quite a lot of them once toss is starting getting arbiters. 75minerals (!), great range (9!), really good dps is really worth it. And as game progress terran should be having more and more turrets, building less vultures (mineral heavy units) and more gas heavy ones (tanks,vessels, probably bcs etc). Its not about ultra safe play. Arbiter tech is expensive and its basically only way which can create holes in terrans defences lategame.
But lets assume that after you reinforce you do everything perfectly. You reinforce with science vessels, emp the arbiters to he can't block the path with arbiters, and then what?
The toss just retreats. Remember at this point he has already killed an expansion + a handfull of workers and 5 tanks. And this is assuming that you do get emp off before science vessel. Again, what if your slightly too late with your emp off the science vessel and he manages to stasis your science vessel and then a part of your retreating force? This isn't as easy as you make it out to be, and definitely punishes the "1 second mistake too severe".
How long does statis work? 20seconds? And during these 20 seconds toss is killing all mines, planetary and 5 tanks and is leaving before you do anything? With what force he is attacking? Come on!
Also, how many statises he has avalible? Its 125 energy on super expensive unit. 1 emp and he has to wait for loooooong time.
Show nested quote +Battles often are decided by one bad step, or one bad decision. Loosing 2 stalkers earlygame to 3 mines can be lethal. Moving your army into vs siege line will always cost you a lot. Misscalculating can cost you half of your army or more. Games are often won by one big mistake. And also, hiting emp is not win when you are defending. It will only stop attacking toss. He will be able to come back later. Also, if you wont hit EMP, you can delay toss in other ways. You can cast nerve jammers as well.
So moving your army into a siege line will primarily make your army lose shield and only a cuple of units, but after you realize your mistake you can retreat. This will have turned the game from a 50vs50 to 45-55 typically. Half of your army doesn't get freezed and die because of that splitsecond mistake. If the opposite is indeed the case, then I would definitely suggest a couple of changes to make small mistakess less severe. But at this point I have not seen any game where a protoss player lost cus he lost like 2 stalkers to mines early on.
Its not splitsecond mistake getting half of your army frozen. Its lack of preparation or reaction to toss action. It shouldnt be easy to land good statis but it should be way of punishing terrans for stacking their units. Im not sure how big aoe is but it should be way of punishing mistakes. So late game mechanics gotta be powerful and game changing under certain circumstances.
Also a splitsecond mistake hardly kills you early game (like 4gate vs 4gate did in WOL). However, remember as well that early game it is alot easier to avoid splitsecond mistake since you only need to have your attention of one groups of units typically.
Yup. Its better here than in wol. Though you can still die to "splitsecond" mistakes, but thats good.
Btw, remember that science vessel gets freezed as well from stasis which mean you can't cast nerve jammer..
Why would Vessel got frozen? You are not supposed to float it over tanks and freezing single unit is huge waste.
Show nested quote +You shouldnt complain about that. Vessels are cheaper, earlier tech and emp cost less energy. Also, terran have best maphacks in game. Its not like you CANT predict your opponents movement. Scans, floating buildings, 9 range turrets AND sensor towers makes defending MUCH easier. Not sure why you want to use the phrase complain. This is merely an observation; That controlling all units perfectly is alot more difficult when your more spread out than when you just have one deathball, which basically means that the punishment for nonperfect control should be less severe. You had sensor towers and scans as well in WOL.
You dont need sensor towers in wol. As you said. You can predict quite well where is opponents army there and here you are often against more smaller squads, often with increased mobility. Maybe you can use sensor towers here to predict your opponents movement?
What do you mean about vessels being cheaper? Are you suggesting that the mech'ing terran should build like 6+ science vessel and spread them out preemptively all over the map do cover all tank lines?
Why 6+? You can have 3-4. And why not 6+ in lategame? Nerve jammers are BADASS. Emp is BADASS. Detection is also good. Having them wont hurt you. They can often be as game changing as arbiters. Try them.
The problem isn't that to defend 2 positions efficiently in tvp mech, that is somewhat easy, as can be shown on a map like blue storm. The problem is when there are more attack paths than that and you need to reposition your army constantly, and attacking with mech is likely too mechancially challenging as well which simply incentivizes heavy turtle play. If you have to mass turrets every where when you move forward the game will become too slow and less action-oriented than what we should strive for.
Tanks should be slow and immobile, and player should be incentivized to slow push with tanks. However, there is a thin line between pushes being too slow and creating boring games (which will happen if you need to build turrets everywhere), and the immobility of tanks to be a great thing (as it allows the opponent to outmultiask the meching terran).
If toss have MASS arbiter you either gotta land godly emp or build turrets everywhere. Arbiter gotta be that strong for time and cost it comes for.
Best would be if you could upload some replays. Im not good terran and i dont have as much expirience as you.
|
On February 20 2013 21:42 NukeD wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 19:28 Big J wrote:On February 20 2013 18:54 NukeD wrote:
Yeah deathballs do occur in BW, but they are not as clumped up as in SC2 or Starbow. Deathballs should exist in my opinion, it adds variety to the game, but not in the way where you can only see a bunch pf healthbars on top of eachothet. More importantly, as Decemberscalm mentioned, when they are not as clumped up, its possible to engage a deathball with smaller amount of units a d still hold ground.
And yes I agree there is a lot more to it why deathballs occur, I just suggested that the root of the problem is the pathing. Everything else, the units, economy etc, are factors that are build upon the pathing. You cant fix the later if you dont fix the former. If you try that then you get a bunch of odd and watered down solutions like Hellbats being biological, widow mines costing supply or siege tanks doing lower damage. The pathing is the easy fix. And the most annoying one for the player. In 2013 this is a very cheap fix to a game not offering enough strategic depth to promote spread out play. What an RTS game has to get right to avoid deathball play is the action per production ratio. Im not saying he should make it worse. Just make it different.
The way SC2BW does it, turning off unit pushing in addition to formation diameter setting like we have in Starbow.
This is a pain in the ass for SC2 players. While this setting works great for a purely BW mod, from what we've tested it hasn't been worth the frustration it could bring. SC2BW pathing was on the NA map pool for quite a while before we decided it just wasn't worth it. It didn't fit Starbow anywhere near as beautifully as it does SC2BW.
Maverick did a ton of research on getting a pathing system for SC2, including building his own for purely 8 way movement. After all his hard work, he settled on diameter and push.
I did some of my own research as well. Pathing is really a symptom of the engine, it is nowhere close to being an easy fix, even for dedicated indivuduals like Maverick.
For instance, you can't simply turn auto surround for melee units off, you can't turn off the very school of fish like movement of grouped units. To get around that you have to do really funky stuff like turning off pushing, and giving units variable speed so they'll run in to each other.
|
@statis change
I like it, though I agree with you in that I think it would be too weak against non siege tank units. Let it stay in effect for 5 (slow and statis'd) seconds OR when the terran unit leaves the field, which ever is later. 5 seconds seems a little weak though, consider the units can move as well. That should be tested.
|
Getting 5 tanks + some goliaths statised in one statis is basically usage of 100% potential of statis. How many units it can freeze? Last time i checked it was 8. Either, aoe is broken, as it should punish stacking units, or you are stacking these units.
Who talked about just one stasis? 5 arbiters can do quite a bit of work.
Turrets are cheap. And you are supposed to have quite a lot of them once toss is starting getting arbiters. 75minerals (!), great range (9!), really good dps is really worth it. And as game progress terran should be having more and more turrets, building less vultures (mineral heavy units) and more gas heavy ones (tanks,vessels, probably bcs etc). Its not about ultra safe play. Arbiter tech is expensive and its basically only way which can create holes in terrans defences lategame.
There are two things here;
1) You assume you can have turrets everywhere compared to just a few strategical locations. I agree that if you only plan to do 100% turtle and never attack you can probably get away with massings turrets too some extent, hwoever if you wanna put a bit pressure and can new ground, you will have to move forward to new terran. In that proces I am building turrets at a decent rate (as I can afford it). BUt you should never be in a situation where you can mineral dumb mass turrets. If that's the case the protss has failed at putting pressure on the terran. Building a few turrets at key locations should be the standard, but that doesn't completely prevent 5 arbiters from getting damage stasis off (and wouldn't it be boring if you could just counter a unit by building turrets?).
The thing is; I actually play as you suggest. I do get fewer vulturs later game, i do get turrets (as long as I can afford them), but its still not enough cus your spread so thin in the late game which makes it insanely difficult to position everything perfectly which seems to be neccesary against arbiters. I think that's a design flaw because attacking with arbiters succesfully doesn't require the same amount of skill as defending against them.
How long does statis work? 20seconds? And during these 20 seconds toss is killing all mines, planetary and 5 tanks and is leaving before you do anything? With what force he is attacking? Come on!
Also, how many statises he has avalible? Its 125 energy on super expensive unit. 1 emp and he has to wait for loooooong time.
Im sure its longer. Definitely closer to 30+ seocnds. No doubt he can kill those units and a planatry.
Why would Vessel got frozen? You are not supposed to float it over tanks and freezing single unit is huge waste.
Again your assuming that having perfect positioning all the time is easy. Have you ever tried spltting your army up in several locations in the late game? having all your units perfectly positioned (tanks and science vessel) is very very difficult. Some times it happens that science vessel aren't slightly in front of your tanks. Which means they can get stasis'ed along with your tanks. Actually this has happned very often for me, and sure I could do better with training, but the thing is; Arbiters likely doesn't require the same amount of training to use succesfully.
You dont need sensor towers in wol. As you said. You can predict quite well where is opponents army there and here you are often against more smaller squads, often with increased mobility. Maybe you can use sensor towers here to predict your opponents movement?
Ohh you definitely should get sensor towers (they are at leat efficiently) in WOL when you go mech. As siege tanks are weaker you shuld not siege them up preemptively, and as your spread out over fewer bases you can often times move your siege tanks in response to the opponents army movement. In Starbow this isn't the case as your spread out so much thinner.
Why 6+? You can have 3-4. And why not 6+ in lategame? Nerve jammers are BADASS. Emp is BADASS. Detection is also good. Having them wont hurt you. They can often be as game changing as arbiters. Try them.
You assume I don't try them? I do, and I find it ridicilously difficult to always have science vessel in position to emp arbiters. I kinda get the feeling that you have not played that many tvp's on 4+ bases with having your army spread out over multiple locations. If that's not the case please upload a few replays where you beat a solid protoss player who puts pressure on you in the early and midgame, (basically he should have roughly a +200 ressources mineral advantage through most of the game), and gets quite a few arbiters in the later stages of midgame/early lategame, while trying to attack your weak links (rather than just attacking into your main army).
If toss have MASS arbiter you either gotta land godly emp or build turrets everywhere. Arbiter gotta be that strong for time and cost it comes for.
So I think you kinda misunderstand my intention. I could upload replays and you could say that I should do xx instead of yy (probably multiple times). I can see that my self, and I never said that arbiters can't be deal with it. My point, however, is that they punishes small mistakes too hard. Honestly I am trying to get turrets up at key locations and I am trying to split my tanks and get some mines while securing new expansions, and I am also trying to land key emp's, and some times it works and the protoss army retreats. However, even if it works just 50% of the time, I still end up losing the game, as I need to play a mistakefree game for 30+ minutes to win. This feels somewhat unfair on most maps as you get challenged over and over by decent protoss's. I honestly feel that as long as you don't get caught up unsieged and as long as you have the correct army composition (and can detect cloacked units as well) then you should be able to trade at least on even food with a protoss player. Otherwise playing mech simply becomes too difficult.
Secondly, let me try to understand your design philosophy a bit better. Do you like abilities/units which can turn the game from a 50%vs50% into an 80%+vs 20%- within 1 second?
Or wouldn't you prefer (as I do) abiltiies which can turn the game into 55%vs45% within 1 second, then 60% vs 40% within the next 2 seconds, and like 65% vs 35% over 10 seconds? (assuming the one player makes multiple mistakes and not just 1 mistake).
If the latter is the case, I think my suggested stasis is better. It still has the same role as the previous stasis, and EMP is still the primary counter, however the punishment is just smaller.
|
I think the new patch completely wiped out all custom games on WoL b.net. Might wait for a tiny bit for a patch from Kabel before uploading.
|
On February 21 2013 05:36 Chronopolis wrote:
@statis change
I like it, though I agree with you in that I think it would be too weak against non siege tank units. Let it stay in effect for 5 (slow and statis'd) seconds OR when the terran unit leaves the field, which ever is later. 5 seconds seems a little weak though, consider the units can move as well. That should be tested.
Yeh I kinda thought that the siege tanks should no longer be slowed after they leave the area of the stasis. However, if they don't leave it within 5 seconds then the units get freezed. Likely it will be difficult to get all untis out of the area if you have to unisege them first, and you may lose something the moment the unit get out of the stasis area as the protoss could be able to surround it, but losing 1-3 tanks is probably a fair punishment for a mistake.
I would like to adjust this suggestion to make it work in the other matchups, but frankly I have no idea how arbiters works in the other matchups so I can't help there. I just hope Kabel acknowledges the design problem of the current arbiter and makes a change which punishes the mech'ing terran less while still making it viable in other situations. I made this suggestion as I thought it would still make stasis work releatively similar to how it is today, but just less punishing. But other suggestions could definitely work as well.
|
Arbiters aren't really used in pvz I think, because archon ht is so good. Pvp, haven't seen a game of pvp in months.
Edit: By the way, I think it would be a good idea to get everyone in starbow together and have a night of arcade/ customs. Would be fun.
|
Why are you bashing BW's Arbiters as being OP? Arbiters cost 4 supply, massing them is very dangerous to your army composition and size.
However I agree that stasis could have a small activation time, hell I thought about it too.
|
Heres an idea:
Stasis field: Creates a freezing field on the map lasting 10 seconds, slowing any units inside by 30-50%. Units that stay in the field for more than [HP of unit] * 0.02 seconds are frozen into unbreakable crystals that last for 15 seconds.
Basically making smaller faster units have less time to react, but bigger beefier units are frozen quicker. Added benefit of shortening the time for damaged units.
Alternatively make the field slow for for the first second, then for each second that passes, units with below 50x[passed seconds] HP are frozen.
Then again, I don't think Stasis in its current form is so bad. If we want to level the playing field on lower levels, we could probably just make the arbiter a bit more clunky to use so its as difficult to use right as it is to position defences for terran.
|
Russian Federation26 Posts
Stasis field: Creates a freezing field on the map lasting 10 seconds, slowing any units inside by 30-50%. Units that stay in the field for more than [HP of unit] * 0.02 seconds are frozen into unbreakable crystals that last for 15 seconds.
I think the starcraft spells must be much easier, this is not a dota 
|
On February 22 2013 00:37 PunchTheBag wrote:Show nested quote +Stasis field: Creates a freezing field on the map lasting 10 seconds, slowing any units inside by 30-50%. Units that stay in the field for more than [HP of unit] * 0.02 seconds are frozen into unbreakable crystals that last for 15 seconds.
I think the starcraft spells must be much easier, this is not a dota
Well most players won't exactly know how long time it takes before their units are freezed (whether its 3.42123 or 3.84544 seconds), but I don't think that really matters as the underlying intuition is relatively simple (big units takes longer to freeze). After a couple of games players will quickly get a feeling for how long time it takes before it freezes.
Then again, I don't think Stasis in its current form is so bad.
This game might change your mind.
http://drop.sc/306045
Now I know I mispositioned in the game midgame, and therefore had a worse economy and would very likely had lost the game over time even without arbiters. However, lets instead imagine that the game was somewhat even before the last battle, as army supply indeed was very similar. Now look at how insanely I get raped by these stasis'ed. The thing is; that even if you do have a couple of scicen vessel, you often times never really do not know exactly where they come from. Often times they suddenly dissapear, and then its already to late as you need scicence vessel in perfect position preemptively to have a chance to win.
I don't think I ever should lose a battle that decisvely when I have such a huge number of siege tanks sieged up. Sure if I got caught unsiged it would be fun, but that is just ridcilously. The mech player already gets punished by having an immobile army (which I actually did get in this game as I didn't defend my 3rd very well and didn't take the correct 5th fast enough). But also punishing him this hard for not having absolutely perfect splitting of individual siege tanks and sciecne vessels is just too much.
Dropship suggestions
Even though dropships has received an indirect buff due to FRB, they are still much worse than their sibling, the medivac, in SC2. I think one of the most enjoyfull things about WOL was how often people dropped, since medivacs were bascially free. Ìts not like they are useless in Starbow, but personally I would prefer seing them even more, but with the current stats of the dropships it is too often not efficient to get them for 4 reasons;
1) At a cost of 100/100 (same as a medivac) they take up a higher portion of your total army value than in WOL as your army typically is smaller in Starbow.
2) Typically you can't afford more than 1 starport, and often times you want to use that starport for vikings (vs mutas) or a constant production of science vessels.
3) And of course they don't heal.
4) Compared to bw, protoss's can now warp in units to defend vs dropship harass which for example makes tank dropping quite cost ineffictive.
I actually suggest that since dropship harass is extremely entertaining, that we try and buff this unit by quite a lot, as I doubt it will lead to any kind of imbalanced play.
1) Reduce cost to 75/75.
2) Reduce building time from 42 seconds to 30 seconds (to make it possible to produce dropships and SV's out of 1 starport).
3) Give the starport a late game upgrade to pick up sieged tanks, so you don't have to unsiege them and then put then in the dropship. However when tanks gets unloaded they come out in nonsiege mode (even if they were loaded in siege mode).
Often times the terran can't really do a lot about a protoss taking several bases in the late game (on larger maps) while going mech. This means that (assuming arbiters gets redesigned) that terarn will become too strong on smaller maps (10 base maps), but too weak on larger maps (like 14-16 base maps). The siege tank in dropship willl give the terran an option to outmultitask the protss on larger maps.
|
|
|
Replaced backdoor rocks with "Rocks stacked":
Description: These rocks must be destroyed 4 times, by normal attacks, or 1 only once by units with splash damage.
One rock has 500 hp and 3 armor.
|
On February 22 2013 02:24 Laertes wrote:
I don't any of these design changes are necessary! Let's figure out the metagame before redesigning EVERYTHING! I hate when people just jump in and think that something is OP, it drives me mad when things get changed so drastically after beta! Your opinion is not EVERYONES, seriously, I have been here from the beginning and while I hate change in general, it is not right to do all this to starbow when things are working fine. Why was stasis not op in BW? HUH? WAS IT THE DURATION? Goddamn i'm really afraid these changes are gonna be IMPLEMENTED!
I also liked reapers in WOL and siege tanks in WOL when they did 60 damage to everything and when we played on Steppes of war...........
Honestly I can't give you a great answer about BW because I didn't play it, but once again you seem to miss the whole point; It's not about Arbiters being OP. Its about them being badly designed. If they were just op I would have suggested reducing the AOE, but that isn't the main problem with them.
Anyway I have some theories regarding BW;
1) No warp tech which led to the punishment for the terran losing the battle less severe.
2) No warp tech which means that a terran can punish a 5+ basing toss with drops. A terran can't do that in Starbow which makes it somewhat easy for the toss to get a lot of geysers.
3) I think it was Puccini who told me that the reason stasis is broken in Starbow is because there is smartcast.
4) Also am I wrong about this (?), wasn't protoss the easiest race to play in BW? Maybe even in BW it did require more skills to play against arbiters than use them.
5) Maybe the "effective" AOE was smaller in BW compared to how much units clumbed up, which led to the design flaw of stasis being less severe (?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
