|
@baneling
Currently the baneling has 3 different ways to inflict damage:
-1° way)Baneling attack of his own accord opponent units (a click, click right on opponent units, attack/patrol comand)
-2° way)Baneling dead baneling dies releasing acid
-3° way)Baneling use detonate ability (hotkey x). This ability is used very little.
Currently each action listed, it deals the same amount of damage.
We should modified damage according to the action of attack used.
1° way: We must discourage the use banelings "a click". Strongly reducing the damage it deals. (25 damage vs light).
2° way: I think we should reward the player that kills more baneling before impact. Slightly Reduce damage if baneling is dead from opponent units. (30 damage vs light).
3° way. The ability to detonate, it is risky to use, because you might miss the target, and can require micro. Favor the player who uses this ability, ensuring the currently damage vs opponent units (40 damage vs light).
|
I just watched the tournament on Decembers stream. Thanks for all good games & great casts by VrumFondel, December and Xiphias.. (and Danko via text ^^ )
Just to clearify: I do not intend to leave Starbow forever. Its just that right now in my life a lot of other stuff takes much time. Plus that I have lost the "spark.." Usually I enjoy to sit down with pen and paper and calculate, invent, draw and experiment with different solutions for balance or design.. I just need to take a break, probably until HoTS is released.
BUT.. I did not know about the new interface and the new patch.. (I havent been online for over a week) There seems to be some weird bugs now - extractor not showing up, marines have combat shield animation and the numbers above the hatchery/CC/Nexus do not correspond with the actual workers needed. And that kinda annoys me :p
I have talked with XiA and he will look at these problems. (For those who do not know, he does an amazing amount of work with Starbow, since he is really really good at the editor.)
Since a "bug fix patch" will be uploaded anyways, I might aswell do some balance changes too - tweak some stats, adjust values etc. That can be done quickly. I will NOT redesign anything right now - not any spell, any unit etc, that many of you have discussed lately. Instead, when HoTS is released, there will be room for design changes, either by me, or by someone else...
But I need your help with this balance patch. Here are some areas I look at:
- Unsieged tanks will outrange lurkers? Right now, they do not!
- Units with Matrix on it can NOT be neural parasited anymore.
- Bio in TvZ seems horrible. I consider to either buff firebats, so they 2-shot zerglings, or make combat shield NOT require an armory.. It will still reduce dmg above 20 to 20 BUT also give +10 life to marines.
- Make Dropships more viable for Terran. Faster build time? A little cheaper? Cheaper Starport? Faster BT on Starport?
- Nerf Queens DPS or life? Both P and T early aggression is easily shut down vs Zerg "for free" since Z always has a Queen anyway..
- The Stasis Field debate has been a hot topic here in the thread. I have not seen many games with it lately. Should its AoE be nerfed? More expensive casting cost? Arbiter lower HP? Or some other easy solution..
- Some of the points already suggested by others on the previous pages!
Again, I will only do value adjustments to these things. NOT rework or redesign how stuff works. This will go quick. But please share your views and suggestions on this. I will have some free hours on wednesday evening. I will try to get it all together, upload it and then focus on other stuff in life for a few weeks.
|
I am certain everyone dislikes anti micro abilities.
Stasis was okay in Brood War (still a little infuriating) because it was so hard to pull off. The slowly freezing into a crystal was a good idea, really any way you can micro out of it if you are paying attention is nice. Maybe a Dark Archon sort of, move or you will be frozen sort of thing. Projectile?
I absolutely hate queens for that reason. Less harass, less fun. Perhaps make them slightly tankier, but less damage. That way, your critical eco units are not so easily snipable from a small squad like they are now, but don't shut down plenty of forms of harass without much thought put in. Make their combat priority lower than drones so you don't have to manually click every drone to harass a zerg player. With higher hp queens would just absord all the damage meant for harass (they already buy plenty of time for a drone pull, so things like storm drops are way more effective).
|
About bio Vs Zerg (since that is what I know more about in Starbow than anything else (Note: NOT anyone else)). It was almost only me and PunchTheBag who played zerg Vs Bio and it was almost only Chronopolis who played bio Vs Zerg as well. It is not that bad. I am so happy I never had to play Vs Azelja (aka HyunA). He also plays bio, but does it very differently and much more deadly. He uses drops and tanks a lot more whereas I felt Chrono was more passive. Note: This is not about saying who is better or worse, this is to make the point that bio can be very good vs Zerg but it was perhaps not displayed much in the tournament since Azelja got knocked out so quickly (and never got to play TvZ), and Pucinni favors mech as well. If he played bio, I'm sure he could have beat us good with that as well.
Edit: Good to have you in the forum again Kabel. Heavy discussions without you feels very unproductive.
|
I have another idea. Give arbiter Disruption Web.
It serves the same purpose for Toss. It is a gap closer so Toss can gets its fragile (compared to the Terran mech DPS) but deadly short ranged units in close.
It isn't just a one shot you lose button that works poorly with smart casting. You need to be accurate and quick to select where exactly you want the d webs, plus arbiters have to balance risk and reward for how far they are going to fly in to cast it. This isn't like Dark Swarm where it covers your units path so casters can cast from a distance effectively.
It works so much better with the SC2 style of having multiple casters and plenty of spells going off to reach more effectiveness with smart cast.
Oh and it can be clutch micro'ed away from.
|
|
|
thx for the VODs very fun games!
|
On February 25 2013 02:24 Danko__ wrote:Anyone wanna play starbow right now? Show nested quote +@Chrono
in what world does hydras pwn straight gateway units?
i see the hydras just getting slaughtered by zealots and stalkers all the time..
and with templars its just a massive holocaust if the zerg doesnt have a upgrade advantage..
if anything i think hydras should get a buff.. Yeah. Speedlots shred trough hydras so fast its not even funny. Pure stalker is probably most terrible option vs hydras but Zealot/Stalker with zealots tanking is quite efficent as well. But i cant agree on buff for hydras. They are fine as they are right now.
Huh, this is probably because zealots are 9 damage default, which is in turn because of the zergling. My apologies, my only reference was vods and a few games where hydras were 100 hp. If things are like you describe, that sounds fine.
On February 25 2013 06:30 decemberscalm wrote:
I have another idea. Give arbiter Disruption Web.
It serves the same purpose for Toss. It is a gap closer so Toss can gets its fragile (compared to the Terran mech DPS) but deadly short ranged units in close.
It isn't just a one shot you lose button that works poorly with smart casting. You need to be accurate and quick to select where exactly you want the d webs, plus arbiters have to balance risk and reward for how far they are going to fly in to cast it. This isn't like Dark Swarm where it covers your units path so casters can cast from a distance effectively.
It works so much better with the SC2 style of having multiple casters and plenty of spells going off to reach more effectiveness with smart cast.
Oh and it can be clutch micro'ed away from.
Too little impact against, say golaiths, especially spread out ones. With the slow change given by hider, it will buy you 4 seconds versus golaiths, at the very least. Zealots will ineffectually run under the disruption web to try and kill the sieged tanks. This is all theorycraft though. On the plus side it works on buildings as well. The other difference is that has no stopping power, ie. it can't slow down units from getting from point a to point b.
On February 25 2013 06:25 Xiphias wrote:
About bio Vs Zerg (since that is what I know more about in Starbow than anything else (Note: NOT anyone else)). It was almost only me and PunchTheBag who played zerg Vs Bio and it was almost only Chronopolis who played bio Vs Zerg as well. It is not that bad. I am so happy I never had to play Vs Azelja (aka HyunA). He also plays bio, but does it very differently and much more deadly. He uses drops and tanks a lot more whereas I felt Chrono was more passive. Note: This is not about saying who is better or worse, this is to make the point that bio can be very good vs Zerg but it was perhaps not displayed much in the tournament since Azelja got knocked out so quickly (and never got to play TvZ), and Pucinni favors mech as well. If he played bio, I'm sure he could have beat us good with that as well.
Edit: Good to have you in the forum again Kabel. Heavy discussions without you feels very unproductive.
I played bio into bio mech against Azelja, in the first game he went infestor hydra something, which was a close game. The second game he went fast lurkers with low eco, our armies went past each other and so I killed his third, while coming back to clean up his push with a ridiculous 360 sandwich.
The games versus you on matchpoint I lost too much against the quick speedlings and never quite built up the speedling count. The game against punch the bag I didn't scout his low-eco 2 base lurker hydra rush, and went on to lose a push cost-ineffectively and died to the counter. In both games I had an scv lead while the push was happening. Both games don't really say much conclusive.
---------
Don't banelings do like 40 damage against light? One argument why banelings in starbow destroy early pushes.
marines dps is weaker.
zergling hp is higher.
medivacs are medics, which die if you lose your push. In sc2, usually if zerg let terran build up 10+ medivacs, they'd almost assuredly lose. At least that's how it looked, from watching gsl games.
Other observation is that both lurkers and banelings are low larvae intensive units. Because the zerg macro mechanic is brutally difficult when combined with other things, zergs at the current level have less larvae then they should have. It becomes an easy alternative to just dump all your money into morphed units, meaning that zerg can use all their resources worth of army in the battle even though they otherwise wouldn't have enough larvae.
For example, how many times do you see zerg spending their money when they are going pure hydra drone + expoing.
----
I think terran can use floating building to scout and clear lurkers off of high ground.
I'm on the fence with whether to call matrix an interesting interaction, or saying it's too strong/terran relies too much on it. It's sort of like a dark swarm imo, very positional.
I believe fungal and plague on the same unit is too good, with a few infestors you can shutdown any terran ball, minus a critical mass of 8+ tanks. Movement speed debuff from fungal can be reduced to, attack speed reduction can stay the same. Simply put, fungaled units just doesn't have a change to get do anything against banelings or lurkers rushing in, nor darkswarm if the spell was moved to swarm guardian. I am saying this without concrete knowledge, so Discuss.
Combat shield accessible from the factory and high ground miss percentage reduced to 30-40% would be nice, discuss.
Does lurker splash miss when firing from low ground? (it should)
|
On February 24 2013 22:40 Kabel wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
I have actually lost my passion and excitement for the development of Starbow....
Yea... : /
I have devoted a year to this project and I have (almost) always felt joy while working and thinking about it. But during the last weeks I have felt more and more... unexcited about it. Almost as if it has become a burden rather than a hobby! This combined with real life stuff that now requires more time and energy, makes it harder for me to continue on Starbow at the moment.
So.. what does this mean?
1) I will reupload all the maps during the week with PunchTheBags ranking system included. ( I do not want to make his work be in vain.)
2) I will take a small "time out" until HoTS is released. Maybe I get some kind of interest and curiosity back. (If I even purchase it)
3) I will still hang around here on TL and visit the thread. I just need a couple of weeks of NOT working on this.
4) Would anyone of you wanna continue the development of Starbow? Maybe make the next patch.
I do not know how to organize this. If everyone wanna do it, things will get shattered. So the best would be if either 1 person, or a small group of persons (2-3) communicate together and work on this. Ofc everyone in the thread can contribute ideas etc. But someone gotta do the hard work in the editor and take the final decisions of values, changes etc. For the last two months, XiA has done all the hard work in the editor and I have taken almost all the decisions regarding what to do, in terms of balance, changes etc.
So yeah.. Thats it I guess. I will hang around. If anyone wanna do the work for the next patch, just PM me or write it here in the thread.
No worries man, thanks for your work.
Kabel, I don't mind if we don't implement design changes immediately because they take a lot of work to code, though I think we shouldn't disconsider them in our discussion.
|
- Unsieged tanks will outrange lurkers? Right now, they do not!
Why? I feel like lurkers works fine now?
- Units with Matrix on it can NOT be neural parasited anymore.
Again, why is that neccesary? Also I believe that this will make NP somewhat useless, as matrix is alread an insanely strong ability against a zerg (slightly OP). I don't see any reasons to further strenghen this ability and nerf neutral parasite. The counter to neutral parasite is currently focus firing by siege tanks. This incentivizes keeping your tanks somewhat clumped up together which doesn't require any specific preparation (thus there should be a punishment for not being able to focus fire infestors with siege tanks as it doesn't require korean gosu mechanics to do it).
Bio in TvZ seems horrible. I consider to either buff firebats, so they 2-shot zerglings, or make combat shield NOT require an armory.. It will still reduce dmg above 20 to 20 BUT also give +10 life to marines.
Its horrible because in Starbow (unlike WOL and BW), you have no realiable way of doing soft pressure (like medivac/hellion/banshee/marine) openings. Thus any kind of pressure build you do with bio is insanely coinflipping.
Also unlike BW where you could do a bio + SV midgame push, the zerg in starbow can easily outproduce you with pure bling/muta. There really is no way reason for a zerg player to use lurkers defensively since he often times will be 30-50 supply ahead of the terran in the midgame.
Buffing firebats will make early pressure build slightly stronger and require a bigger response from the zerg player, however I still feel like it won't be enough remove the coinflippiness of the push (like the zerg will still be able to outproduce you which means he then can deny your 3rd forever while droning up heavily).
But given that you won't attempt any big changes (like toning down zerg macro mechanics slightly), I think your suggested changes will make the gameplay slightly more dynamic (as I believe the situation is so severe I would consider buffing both marines early game and firebats at the same time).
- Make Dropships more viable for Terran. Faster build time? A little cheaper? Cheaper Starport? Faster BT on Starport?
You could probably do all of them at once, and it won't have any negative impact on gameplay. Think about the worst case scenario of "overbuffing" dropships? That terran players start building lots of dropships through the whole game to outmultitask the opponent? Doesn't exactly sound like bad gameplay.
Nerf Queens DPS or life? Both P and T early aggression is easily shut down vs Zerg "for free" since Z always has a Queen anyway..
This will probably help with reducing the before mentioned problem of zerg getting too much ahead in the early midgame by making pressure builds stronger. Still not sure that any of these changes (even combined) will give a terrans midgame timings. Rather I think these changes will have the effect of making it easier for a terran to be on even food with the zerg player in the midgame which makes turtling easier.
This will make it easier for the terran to get a critical mass of siege tanks which can be unbeatable if matrix'ed. This is basically why I believe any nerfs to zerg early game should probably be combined with a slight matrix nerf.
- The Stasis Field debate has been a hot topic here in the thread. I have not seen many games with it lately. Should its AoE be nerfed? More expensive casting cost? Arbiter lower HP? Or some other easy solution..
Obiviously I would have prefered that you chose to fix the fundemental problem by redesigning the unit, however I believe the best easy solution that minimizes the design flaw is to slightly reduce the AOE of stasis.
At Xiphias;
About bio Vs Zerg (since that is what I know more about in Starbow than anything else (Note: NOT anyone else)). It was almost only me and PunchTheBag who played zerg Vs Bio and it was almost only Chronopolis who played bio Vs Zerg as well. It is not that bad. I am so happy I never had to play Vs Azelja (aka HyunA). He also plays bio, but does it very differently and much more deadly. He uses drops and tanks a lot more whereas I felt Chrono was more passive. Note: This is not about saying who is better or worse, this is to make the point that bio can be very good vs Zerg but it was perhaps not displayed much in the tournament since Azelja got knocked out so quickly (and never got to play TvZ), and Pucinni favors mech as well. If he played bio, I'm sure he could have beat us good with that as well.
I don't think the problem with bio oriented play (which I define as bio openings combined with adding siege tanks in the midgame) is that you can't be cost effective, or that you can't open up safely against your style of low drone offensive builds. I think Chrono lost to you because he mained as protoss in WOL, and thus doesn't have enough experience controlling marines and tanks. There was nothing in these games that made me believe there were any balance issues.
However, I believe that when zerg takes a very fast 3rd as a response to a fast expanding terran, then a zerg with great macro will severely outproduce the terran player (assuming he doesn't go for early timing attacks like you prefer).
There is simply very little the terran can do against that isn't coinflippy At least I know that an early 8 minute timing attack is very easily held by just pure lings. A sligtly later 9 minute 3rax timing attack can still be easily held by blings. A later timing attack requires 3 bases, but to secure 3 bases the terran is simply coinflipping when he moves out. He simply won't stand a chance if the zerg player instead of droning up chooses to bling timing attack him when taking his 3rd. Actually the terran has to scan every single base and check for drone count, and then deduct the maximum number of lings that the zerg can have at that point in time given the drone count. This is obivously not realistic, and BW solved that problem by making sure terran at time X had a stronger fighting army (please correct me if I am wrong here, I have just watched a lot of BW games, not actually played it), while WOL solved the problem by introuducing medivacs/hellions/banshees.
Starbow can "solve" the BW wayproblem as well by overbuffing marines and firebats, however this may lead to unintended consequences such as specific terran timing being overbuffed or terrans being unstopable late game (which is bascially why matrix has to be nerfed in order to create a dynamic matchup).
To solve the problem the Sc2 way Starbow can replace the firebat with the hellion. Yeh, I know that is an insane idea, and probably won't be popular by many of the starbow players, and since Kabel is focussing of balance tweaks rather than redesigns, I will not suggest to implement this (atm). But bascially I believe the hellion as a rax unit (I am sure we could solve the biological vs mechanical issue in some way) will create more interesting games as well as making the game less coinflippy.
You can watch the game I uploaded against Jay and notice that I was behind by roughly 50 supply in the midgame. In BW the terran was at a similar timing typically ahead in supply and could move out. I honestly don't think there was any signifcant things I could have done differently (well at least not any stuff that is signifcant enough to justifiy being that much behind).
Usually in the matchup there is betwen the 8-11 minute mark periods where the game is somewhat even in terms of army supply (it depends on how the zerg player drones though), but as I said previously you will never be able to do damage on a reliable fashion (it will always be coinflippy), and I believe that over times zergs will figure out how to scout/react to the various timing attacks.
Chrono talked about that vultures may be the way to go as an opening against zergs and after having tested it vs Puccini I do feel like he probably is correct. The vuluture opening has the same role as hellion in WOL and it means that you can put presusre somewhat reliable against a zerg player while taking map control for a certain period. Obivously Puccini isn't zerg as main race, but his macro was very solid and droning timing seemed pretty much optimal as well, and yet I still managed to get into the midgame somewhat evenly.
|
|
|
On February 25 2013 09:46 Laertes wrote:
I actually like the idea of overbuffing terran units more than replacing firebat with hellion. Too much overlap with vultures for that other idea.
BUT the overbuffing has potential, terran lategame is actually kinda bad at the moment. I like the idea of making terran lategame more powerful. Thoughts?
EDIT: I kinda wanna PTR these changes to see if they'll be any good.
PTR would be both nice and entertaining. I think I will take a look at "how to SCII editor". Though atm I'm a total newbie at that.
@terran lategame
could you expand, I don't quite see that. Bio mech matrix or pure mech is pretty good if you can get on equal footing, and flock of vikings control the sky
@overbuffing the marines being the BW way
was it that way in BW? For sure in sc2, MMM dealt with lings cost effectively, especially when you tuck them in behind the minerals.
|
I'd be a fan of electing a few community members to oversee any future patches for the moment. Preferably players very experienced with Starbow, active, skilled, and knowledgeable. Ideally there should be a consensus for any big changes, and patches in general should be relatively confined to sheer balance.
What do you guys think?
|
We have a couple options for Dropships. We could lower the price and build time, as suggested. Or we could buff the dropship, and replace it with the super-dropship from the campaign. Same 100/100 price, but 16 cargo space instead of 8, and higher health and armor.
I'd rather not add the hellion to the barracks. I think we could re-introduce the Reaper as a good early game harass unit, which can slow down Zergs. It would help in TvP as well, where the Protoss can defend expos too easily atm, due to Recall, Warp-in, and Chrono'd Cannons.
I think we should completely remove the Queen's ability to attack. This forces zerg to commit to more defenses early, and weakens their ability to drone freely.
The problem with the proposed changes to Stasis is that none of them will ever save sieged tanks. Whether it is a projectile or a casting delay, sieged tanks don't have enough time to unsiege and move away. I think we should just remove Stasis. Replace it with a Binding Cloud spell that affects both ground and air units, using the time warp bubble animation, or guardian shield model. Call it Projectile Dissolution. It's kind of a big change, but I feel it's time we break some BW traditions.
|
Possible small nerf for matrix: Each hit the matrix unit sustains reduces the damage reduction of the shield by 2% (so it goes from 75% to 73% to 71% etc).
|
Possible small nerf for matrix: Each hit the matrix unit sustains reduces the damage reduction of the shield by 2% (so it goes from 75% to 73% to 71% etc).
I see two reasons for nerfing matrix;
1) By buffing bio in the early game and midgame, the "overpowered" matrix becomes less of a neccesity as the game will be more even.
2) Matrix makes banelings completely useless in the mid/late game for two reasons; A) It incentivizes terrans building more tanks than in similar situations in WOL, B) Banelings hitting tanks do less damage
I don't think your suggestion will help with reason 2, so if any nerf I prefer just reduing the reduced damage from 75% to 65-70%.
The problem with the proposed changes to Stasis is that none of them will ever save sieged tanks. Whether it is a projectile or a casting delay, sieged tanks don't have enough time to unsiege and move away. I think we should just remove Stasis. Replace it with a Binding Cloud spell that affects both ground and air units, using the time warp bubble animation, or guardian shield model. Call it Projectile Dissolution. It's kind of a big change, but I feel it's time we break some BW traditions.
I think for now (untill wednsday) we should focus on comming up with balance adjustment to the next patch rather than redesign proposals.
BUT the overbuffing has potential, terran lategame is actually kinda bad at the moment. I like the idea of making terran lategame more powerful. Thoughts?
I think chrono can show you games where he has been insanely cost effective with heavy tanks + matrix "abuse" in the lategame. While the composition is immobile, there is no doubt that once terran gets into lategame (assuming he can survive that long), it has a sickload of potential if one can control the units properly.
Buffing Firebat and the marine.
Anyway, there seems to be an agreement behind buffing both marines and firebats at the same time. The question which now arises should be, how should we go about it? What exact changes should be implemented to these units
One could argue that marines should just start with combat shield as default as they aren't particularly strong in the early game, so buffing them there will likely not lead to any OP early timings.
However, if we implement that change as well as buffing the damage output of firebats I think we could create a somewhat weird dynamic where it doesn't really matter how the zerg micro's his units against an early game attack. Both the firebat and the marines have somewhat similar DPS/health ratio which means that the zerg will just attack move his blings/hydras, and the terran will kite back with stim.
Personally I would prefer that we strenghent the role of the firebat as a tanky unit rather than its DPS. Therefore I thought of the below two changes to the firebat;
1) Buff its health/armor.
2) Increase the model size to make marine/medi/firebat pushes more "terrainbased", so you can use the firebat to protect marines more easily.
The firebat as a tank will be a huge buff to a 2 base 3 rax (2 techlab, 1 reactor) timings, but terrans can't just "1TA" across the map. Rather they have to think intelligently on they use the map, so that they don't engage in wide surface area locations, but always make it possible for the firebats to protect the marines.
The midgame dynamic of tvz
In the early midgame terrans can choose to follow up from its early game 3 rax pressure by taking advantage of the (hopefully implemented) cheaper dropships and thus keeping the pressure on the zerg.
The decision on whether to continue to apply pressure on the zerg should depend on the zergs unit composition. If he goes for mutalisks the terran should be incentivized to defend for a certain period of time. Depending on the efficiency of the mutalisk harass the terran should have certain timings once again when he gets matrix + tanks.
When a zerg player opens mutalisks he has two choices;
1) The BW style of mutalisk into lurker into tech.
2) The Sc2 style of muta/bling.
I feel like the game should be balanced with this in mind;
1) Both options should be have different advantages and disadvantages while being somewhat equally strong.
2) Terrans should be able to scan which muta approach the zerg takes, and take the correct response. A) Against muta/bling the terran would be better off playing a more passive game while slowly taking a 4th. The zerg will be incentivized to try to trade armies and abuse immobility. B) Against muta/lurkers into tech the terrans "needs" to end his turtling which means that his fighting army 15-20 minutes into the game needs to be signifcantly stronger than a zerg going for muta/lurkers. On the other hand the zerg needs to use mutalisks to win time and needs to position lurkers on well thought out strategical locations.
Assuming that we can balance the game do create such a metagame (where we take the best from BW and the best from sc2 into one), do you guys think this should be something we shoud strive after?
|
There are indeed some problems both in the gameplay and for the races that could need some improvement, rework or redesign in a broader way. Atm I will not fix any of that. The next small patch will be a band aid, I guess. Notice that none of the stuff I mentioned in the previous post is set in stone. I just pointed at a couple of smaller areas I will probably do adjustments in.
Unsieged tanks will outrange lurkers? Right now, they do not!
- Why? Lurkers are fine now?
This is probably a larger problem in terms of Zerg vs Terran production. Zerg has the potential to squeeze out many more lurkers in the mid game than Terran usually can get tanks. So I think Terran should be able to do "much with little." If T has good micro and is careful, his unsieged tank will be able to fend off some lurkers. Right now Terran has a looong way to go if he is attacked by lurkers - get factory, get tank + siege tech before he is able to fight vs lurker with any ground unit. Ofc banshee is a option too, but it is also quite high on the tech tree. On the other hand, this is maybe just a meta game problem.
- Units with Matrix on it can NOT be neural parasited anymore.
Again, why is that neccesary?
Badly worded by me. I consider to make Matrix make the unit not affected by enemy buffs - plague, neural parasite, stasis field, lockdown etc. But on the other hand, you are right in your arguments, it is probably better to let matrix have it weaknesses. So I will probably leave it as it is instead.
The other adjustments I wrote about are "quick fixes" and not the in-depth fixes many of you would prefer. When HoTS is released, and I´ve had my break, I will probably look at things at a more fundamental level again.
@Hider
My break ends now. So I will not have time to reply to your latest post. But I agree on focus on smaller balance changes that can fix some critical balance flaws. Discussions about larger redesign ideas are important too, but that will not be implemented by me in the next patch anyway.
|
This is probably a larger problem in terms of Zerg vs Terran production. Zerg has the potential to squeeze out many more lurkers in the mid game than Terran usually can get tanks. So I think Terran should be able to do "much with little." If T has good micro and is careful, his unsieged tank will be able to fend off some lurkers. Right now Terran has a looong way to go if he is attacked by lurkers - get factory, get tank + siege tech before he is able to fight vs lurker with any ground unit. Ofc banshee is a option too, but it is also quite high on the tech tree. On the other hand, this is maybe just a "meta game" problem.
I don't think this is correct approach to take. Lurkers vs siege tanks (rather than tanks in mobile mode) is an interesting dynamic. I believe the fundenmental problem is that zergs simply can get too far ahead in the early midgame. Hopefully weaker queens + stronger bio + cheaper dropships will change the metagame in such a way that the game is more even at the time that zergs attack with lurkers.
|
On February 25 2013 06:08 Kabel wrote:
- Bio in TvZ seems horrible. I consider to either buff firebats, so they 2-shot zerglings, or make combat shield NOT require an armory.. It will still reduce dmg above 20 to 20 BUT also give +10 life to marines.
I saw some people wanted to replace firebats with hellions... I'm thinking to, rather than do that, just make them act a little more like Hellbats do in HotS, as well as how they did in campaign
As in, up the damage, and give it some more base armor, and in exchange reduce the splash range so its a small area in front of the firebat as opposed to being closer to a hellions attack.
Something like 12 damage, 15 (medium), 18 (light) damage, and 2 armor, with reduced splash range (1 radius, 45 degree cone)
(bare in mind, a marine attacks about twice as fast, is half the supply, and does 6 damage, so a marine, per supply, would still do better than a firebat. Combine that with the better range on marines and their ability to shoot up, it won't make the marine disappear if this change went through)
As for something else if bio is still too weak, Make stimpacks provide a better fire rate increase, as right now its 50% faster attack rate, and you could always make it 75% or even 100% faster (this could be an alternative to an outright buff to firebat damage). It buffs both Marines AND Firebats.
Also, if Matrix on tanks is too strong, you could always make it have reduced damage % on mech units (such as 65% reduction, 75% reduction on biological)
Why nerf matrix on only mech units? It rewards zergs who manage to NP a medic. It also keeps Matrix just as strong when put on firebats, allowing bio to get another power boost in comparison to mech.
|
On February 25 2013 09:06 Hider wrote:Why? I feel like lurkers works fine now?
Legacy? BW unsieged tanks outrange lurkers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
