| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
Why would terrans need SV vs Toss if EMP was moved to Ghost? But isn't this a problem? You make one unit useless in other to make another unit usefull. I feel like this change serves actually 0 purpose. Rather it would be better to come up with a creative way to fix ghosts. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
 | ||
|
JohnnyZerg
Italy378 Posts
Emp on ghost can be nice, but if bio want be good vs protoss, a flying caster is necessary. I propose to solve ghost without emp, if is necessary give emp. I'm thinking lockdown + snapshot mines vs protoss hihihi. | ||
|
IeZaeL
Italy991 Posts
Keep up the good work ! | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On April 23 2013 23:19 SmileZerg wrote: I agree with Hider. Besides, we already tried EMP on the Ghost for awhile and it was reverted, probably for a good reason. If we just keep making the same change back and forth a dozen times we aren't going to make any progress. Let's not turn EMP into the new Bunker Build Time.  Well bunker changes actually just went one way. Blizzard never really reverted stuff (as I guess they feared it would make them look stupid). But many of their changes had so many goddamn "unintended consequences" that you could write a book about their incompentencies; Early 2011; Mainly protoss and too some extent terran is OP vs zerg. Spring 2011; Infestors gets a huge buff. Late spring 2011; terran loses every time it gets to late game vs zerg. Summer 2011; Terran discovers strenght of ghosts. TvZ is now unwinable for the zerg player if the terran can just turtle (easy on maps like shakuras). Autumn 2011; Ghost snipe gets nerfed to uselessness vs zerg. 2011 and early 2012; Terran mostly loses late game but kinda does okay'ish by outdropping zerg players in the late game. Spring 2012; Queen gets buffed because hellion openings are strong, and this change combined with zerg players being better at contorlling their armies makes tvz very zerg favored. Summer 2012: Blizzard is planning to buff ravens, but then MVP beats patchzerrgs with seeker missile, and Blizzard changes their minds. Autumn 2012; zvx is quite zerg favored. Late autmn 2012; Infestors gets nerfed. At no point during tose 2 years was the game actually considered balanced throughout the whole game. Every single change Blizzard made had unintended consequences, and I hope for the future of Starbow that their mistakes aren't repeated. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Currently Terran players have an enormously easy time with gas compared to other races. A 50 gas increase in cost probably won't make a huge difference, only a slight impact on meching terran. Mid game Terran shouldn't be effected too much because gas income is already. With how much minerals you get compared to gas as a terran, this isn't a massive change. It is a slight go at the economy before a much bigger change is tried. @Sci Vessel VS Ghost We'll come up with a proper lineup for this unit next patch. My problem with the Science Vessel is that it has all three of the best spells in the Terran arsenal. Irradiate, EMP, and Nerve Jammer are all amazing game changers, while the ghost has nuke and snipe. Which one of these is not like the other. Keep coming up with ideas for it. | ||
|
JohnnyZerg
Italy378 Posts
On April 24 2013 02:21 decemberscalm wrote: @Eco Currently Terran players have an enormously easy time with gas compared to other races. A 50 gas increase in cost probably won't make a huge difference, only a slight impact on meching terran. Mid game Terran shouldn't be effected too much because gas income is already. With how much minerals you get compared to gas as a terran, this isn't a massive change. It is a slight go at the economy before a much bigger change is tried. @Sci Vessel VS Ghost We'll come up with a proper lineup for this unit next patch. My problem with the Science Vessel is that it has all three of the best spells in the Terran arsenal. Irradiate, EMP, and Nerve Jammer are all amazing game changers, while the ghost has nuke and snipe. Which one of these is not like the other. Keep coming up with ideas for it. But if we increase the gas cost of medic and Firebat (but reduce minerals cost), you could balance the situation, and SV is more difficult to obtain. Players must know how to choose how to invest the amount of gas. More SV mean having to do too few medic / Firebat / reaper, this could make terran army more vulnerable, but a abuse of medic (i watch game with 20/30 medic), would not have gas for SV. In this way, medic is more valuable. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
We can start by bringing Lockdown back, for one thing. It fits the theme of the sniper support unit - Snipe takes out single Bio units at long range, Lockdown neutralizes single Mech targets at long range. There's a nice symmetry there, but also a difference in that one is damage and one is stun, which keeps things interesting. Another possibility we can look into is the forgotten Drop Pod Calldown they had planned back in SC2 Alpha. Basically the Ghost would target a location just like firing a Nuke, but instead you'd get a pod full of Marines. We can use the Mercenary models for these, name them Black Ops Marines, give them better stats, and you'll purchase them at the Covert Ops as another option next to the Nukes, supply cost and all. You could use these two abilities in combination so that a few Ghosts left behind at your mineral lines can defend from drops, for example. I'm sure players will be able to think of many other uses too. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
After plenty of discussion, Xiphias and I think it'd be nice to have the ghost with snipe, lockdown, and a slightly buffed nuke for now. Science vessel will remain as it is. Excellent points by a lot of people helped us reach that decision. My current plan for nukes is to give ghost academies the ability to hold multiple nukes. That you don't have to invest way too much in infrastructure to nuke. Any further nuke buffs are on the back burner however. We don't want to try anything too crazy yet. @science vessel This one will also wait on next patch. I'd love to analyze more games, play more games, and really make a more insightful change. @Tempest Currently we plan on adding both the carrier, and modifying the Tempest. The tempest will be cheaper, move slightly faster, do less damage, and be more frail. The carrier should serve as a more direct confrontation role, while the tempest will be more of a sniper unit. We'll be keeping an eye on this one to see how it plays out. That is the current idea at least, any ideas are helpful as well. On April 24 2013 00:04 IeZaeL wrote: I'd really like to put in the mod some Models i've collected , like a HD Arbiter/Archons or icons\tooltips\wireframes . I feel this could greatly improve the graphics of the entire mod. So , could someone please send me the mod ? Keep up the good work ! Feel free to show screenshots of your work in this thread and people will voice their opinion of they like them or not. I'd love to see them ^^. The mod is open source. You can find the latest version in the editor on EU: Starbow HoTS. I just ask that people don't publish their own maps and versions as public and or called Starbow, this way people don't get confused what the official map pool is. Thank you .SC2BW has this problem, plenty of old maps published but never deleted because they were forgotten about by old users. | ||
|
JohnnyZerg
Italy378 Posts
On April 24 2013 11:37 decemberscalm wrote: @Tempest Currently we plan on adding both the carrier, and modifying the Tempest. The tempest will be cheaper, move slightly faster, do less damage, and be more frail. The carrier should serve as a more direct confrontation role, while the tempest will be more of a sniper unit. We'll be keeping an eye on this one to see how it plays out. That is the current idea at least, any ideas are helpful as well. I do not think that is the best solution. A tempest cheaper, means make in large quantities. Doing less damage there is less "loss of dps". I proposed only to increase the damage of the tempest and the cooldown of the weapon. In this way, if all the tempests attack a single target, there is a big "loss of dps." exaple: tempest make 70 damage and have a cooldown of 6 sec. If 7 tempest attack a tank, destroy it but only 3 attacks were necessary and not 7, there was more than 50% of the "lost damage ". Protoss player should make micro for reduce this "lost damage". In this way tempest is more good vs build, because the "lost damage" is reduced to almost 0. I hope it's been clear on this topic. Sorry for my bad english. Thx for read. Edit: carrier has a few "loss of dps". A-click is the best solution for use this units. I have an interesting ability to add at tempest: Photonic shock (60 sec for reuse this ability): weapon of tempest: +150% damage and + 100% cooldown for 38 sec (time for launch 3 attacks if normal cooldown weapon is 6). In this way, yeah damage increased very well, but if use tempest a click, there is a great "damage lost". This is a sniper unit ^^ I just ask that people don't publish their own maps and versions as public and or called Starbow, this way people don't get confused what the official map pool is. Thank you . Are you referring to my unit test map versions? Can I delete them and keep the "original". | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
Currently Terran players have an enormously easy time with gas compared to other races. A 50 gas increase in cost probably won't make a huge difference, only a slight impact on meching terran. Mid game Terran shouldn't be effected too much because gas income is already. With how much minerals you get compared to gas as a terran, this isn't a massive change. It is a slight go at the economy before a much bigger change is tried. Whats the point then? Previously Xiphias argued that the only problem was related mass SV late game and you seem to imply that 250 gas Vessels won't fix that. Just read your update that Scicence vessels will stay as they are. But that also implies that there is no fix late game for them? I would define the problem as: Scicence vessels too easy too use in mass late game. So I don't see how/why watching more games will help. Its just about nerfing them late game (but not midgame) or making irradiate a lot more difficult to spam. | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
About tempest. Most players seems to want to let it go, and so do we. We are, however, trying to redefine its role and give it one more try before scrapping it. Making them stronger with ling range will not work (imo) as they will be very hard to deal with. Also, remember. Carriers makes for some interesting timings and are not an a-move unit. They must be closely tendered and can increase in efficiency but good micro. Watch this VOD for reference: These changes has been implemented into HoTS. Anyone up for playing tonight? | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On April 25 2013 01:01 Xiphias wrote: We will leave the vessel for now, but thanks for defining the concern. We will think more about this for the next patch after this. About tempest. Most players seems to want to let it go, and so do we. We are, however, trying to redefine its role and give it one more try before scrapping it. Making them stronger with ling range will not work (imo) as they will be very hard to deal with. Also, remember. Carriers makes for some interesting timings and are not an a-move unit. They must be closely tendered and can increase in efficiency but good micro. Watch this VOD for reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rqx8s2qKXM These changes has been implemented into HoTS. Anyone up for playing tonight? Problem is that that change only works in BW. in Starbow it is quite irrelvant as vikings dont care about it. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
The science vessel "problem" is inherently tied to the economy which would be a much bigger change. Edit: We could approach it from a few different ways. First of all we could see if its possible for players to just kill them. Notice how in games the Z actually gets scourge kills off there isn't really a huge flock of sci vessels. I also don't see plagues on sci vessel groups often. I do see people grabbing them with NP and pulling them into hydras groups pretty often. Next we could make them harder to get in your army via supply change, cost, or build time. All of these have some pros and cons. You've got less flexibility and you reach the 200/200 cap easier via a supply change, with a tiny bit of effect on eco (supply depots required slightly more often). Cost slightly hurts mid game Terran. Not too big of a deal because currently gas is no problem for a Terran player. Late game, even less. There is no easy way to mass dump gas being terran (unlike P: templar, Z:ultra/muta/gaurdian). Build time would hurt early T the most so I think it is the less ideal, but it would have a large impact on the accumulation of sci vessel. Third: Change overall eco, either a global gas change or a terran centric gas change (their unit costs). Fourth, make the spells simply harder to use. @Tempest It needs some sort of role differential. ^^ I know exactly what you mean Johnny Zerg, but its previous version was a less interesting capital ship siege weapon. Basically it overlapped with carrier. @Carrier Remember that vikings do not hard counter carriers. They do well vs light air units. Your best counter vs mass carrier as a Terran is Goliath, so BW micro should absolutely be beneficial and interesting. Dark swarm and hydras an a great counter to carriers for Z. You can always flood scourge, but scourge are a lot of wasted gas used in that way. You decide to trade inefficiently to get rid of the carriers more easily using scourge. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
The science vessel "problem" is inherently tied to the economy which would be a much bigger change. Could you please define in which specific circumstances/situation the science vessel is a problem. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Your test maps are fine ^^. They are not actual 1v1 maps or anything like that. Try to make them private when they are no longer relevant though. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
On April 25 2013 04:45 Hider wrote: Could you please define in which specific circumstances/situation the science vessel is a problem. This is why I'd rather see more games to see if it really is a problem. I'm not entirely convinced it is. The original complaint is that it is simply too easy to get a huge flock of sci vessels. Unlike other races spell casters, these guys tend to stay alive over time and therefore end up being a huge blob. Think about how easy it is for terran to kill enemy casters without trying. With scourge splash in, and a slight acceleration I don't think it will be a huge problem. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
There is no easy way to mass dump gas being terran (unlike P: templar, Z:ultra/muta/gaurdian). Medis and reapers and science vessels? Terrans have great gas dumps and as as I previously said you don't have excessive gas going bio/tank/1 starport SV on 3-4 bases. But the problem is that both reapers and Science vessels scale too well, thus they are too efficient of a gas dump. The problem IMO isn't really the economy. Changing the economy is just one solution, but that will lead to a lot of unintended consequences. The original complaint is that it is simply too easy to get a huge flock of sci vessels. Thas not what I mean.... I believe its too easy to control 10+ SV's (compared to the reward). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
There is no easy way to mass dump gas being terran (unlike P: templar, Z:ultra/muta/gaurdian). Medis and reapers and science vessels? Terrans have great gas dumps and as as I previously said you don't have excessive gas going bio/tank/1 starport SV on 3-4 bases. But the problem is that both reapers and Science vessels scale too well, thus they are too efficient of a gas dump. The problem IMO isn't really the economy. Changing the economy is just one solution, but that will lead to a lot of unintended consequences. The original complaint is that it is simply too easy to get a huge flock of sci vessels. Thas not what I mean.... I believe its too easy to control 10+ SV's (compared to the reward). Its also easy to get 10 HT's but its not nearly as rewarding. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
On April 25 2013 04:58 Hider wrote: Medis and reapers and science vessels? Terrans have great gas dumps and as as I previously said you don't have excessive gas going bio/tank/1 starport SV on 3-4 bases. But the problem is that both reapers and Science vessels scale too well, thus they are too efficient of a gas dump. The problem IMO isn't really the economy. Changing the economy is just one solution, but that will lead to a lot of unintended consequences. Thas not what I mean.... I believe its too easy to control 10+ SV's (compared to the reward). Reapers, medics, and science vessels don't come close to the gas dumps P and Z have. Especially now that you got 1 more mineral per patch. As for SV's. You are correct, we should disable smart casting (ahahahahhha). In all seriousness, I think looking for a ways to make the easy to spam spells more skillful would be helpful. Things like JohnnyZerg sugguested, giving the seeker hunter sort of attack to land an irradiate. We'll see. I'd like a lot more various options for this before we make a decision. | ||
| ||
|
|
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
OSC
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
RSL Revival
Clem vs ByuN
Serral vs SHIN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
