|
I tried a mod for bw + Show Spoiler +, and I found many interesting things as:
-Energy upgrades reworked and different for each race:
-Zerg: energy regenerates 50% faster (200 max, 50 starting).
-Terran: energy regenerates 25% faster, +25 max energy, +12.5 starting (225 max, 62.5 starting).
-Protoss: +50 max energy, +25 starting (250 max, 75 starting).
- Mitosis upgrade on lair or evolution chamber (buildings regeneration is 50% faster).
- Building Armor upgrade : Increase all buildings armor by 2 and stops burning damage.
-Each Shield upgrade slightly increases shield regeneration (with 3 shield upgrades, regeneration is 50% faster)
Other
-Queen Spawns Broodling replaced with Fungal Scourge (Deals damage to target unit and creates an AoE damage zone) + Show Spoiler +nice for infestor. This ability can replaced plague
- Overload ability for Dragoons: increase rate of fire but cannot move and gets disabled for a while. + Show Spoiler +
- Psi Rage ability for Zealots: reduce shields and increase damage, attack speed increases the longer it remains attacking a single target.
Advice to all those who have bw, to try this mod.
|
Some subjects that I think should be discussed for next patch.
First of all we need to decide on which kind of gameplay we want. Personally I like games which have;
- Early game action, which should consist of small risk/small rewards concepts (the reaper is a good example of that. it takes skill to use it optimally, and if you are doing well you can go into the midgame with a 55/60 advantage, but it will seldomly decide the game hand)
- Midgame action, which primarily should consist of small groups of units battling against each other. Losing just one battle shouldn't imply that you lost the game. It is important that at least one player is A) Incentivized to attack the opponent, and B) that the player has the tools to do damage in a reliable fashion (it shouldn't just be coinflipbased attacks.
Lategame action - Should consist of constant action throughout the whole map.
I think due to defenders advantage and the way the economy works, Starbow will always incentivize multitaskbased action in the late game.
However, I think early game action could be rewarded more. For instance what can a bio opening player really do in a TvZ. He can do a 2-base timing attack, but either that will A) Gets countered by strong speedlings, or it will B) Be countered by spinecrawler wall.
In Sc2 a terran player can open hellion, which makes for a skillbased early game action vs zergs. At the same time hellion openings transitions well into bio in the midgame. Vulture openings doesn't do that. So IMO the TvZ matchups needs something in the early game which increases the amount of action in the game. However, it doesn't have to be the terran player that is the aggressor. Today most aggressive zerg openings are too all'insh for my taste, but we can change that by giving zerg a new mechanic. Below is my suggestion;
Nydus avaiable at tier 1.
Obviously certain changes are needed in order for that to work. My suggestion is to cap the supply that can be transfered through each nydus cannal at 2-4. This means that you can only do limited damage with the nydus openings. On the other hand I suggest to reduce the cost of it to make it a less risky opening.
I think this implementation will give each race a lot of opportunities to take advantage of superior micro skills. For instance I can imagine a great zerg player getting 6 zerlings through a nydus worm, attacking workers, and then micro each indivudal ling back into the nydus as they are getting low on life.
|
Thanks for ALL THE GAMES today!!! So much fun!
I was thinking about uploading a ton of replays, but most of you obs most of the games anyway....
Well, whatever, here we go  :
http://drop.sc/330303
http://drop.sc/330304
http://drop.sc/330305
http://drop.sc/330306
http://drop.sc/330307
http://drop.sc/330308
http://drop.sc/330309
I agree with HideR on early - game and mid game, and we are almost there as well (I feel). You can be very aggressive with vultures early game vs zerg to great effect, but you might have to open one-base for it to work. Puccini was awesome at this. This is ofc map-dependend as well.
That is actually another big point. We need the tools but we also need the maps. Some maps are much more harass friendly than others.
Nydus on tier one (reworked...) hmmm we'll think about that...
|
I noticed that losing an expansion, it is a great loss for this the currently games are death ball vs death ball. Players can not afford to lose a base. I want to propose a possible solution.
Reduce income by harvesters, and reduce minerals (1000 or less). Now reduce cost of nexus and centre commande to 350 or 300 and hatchery to 250 or 275. Now player has a lower income but minerals have the same duration cause less minerals quantity (for this 1000 or less).
To avoid making useless the mains/expansions with minerals field depleted, I propose adding a modification: minerals field depleted not disappear and remain with 0 minerals. Harvesters can continue their extraction but with 2 cargo for trip. Same thing can be applied to the geysers as bw.
Now players can build more base, and lose an expansion is less important. In addition they can divide their armies and implement multiple attacks.
thx for read.
|
On May 04 2013 06:23 Xiphias wrote:Thanks for ALL THE GAMES today!!! So much fun! I was thinking about uploading a ton of replays, but most of you obs most of the games anyway.... Well, whatever, here we go : http://drop.sc/330303http://drop.sc/330304http://drop.sc/330305http://drop.sc/330306http://drop.sc/330307http://drop.sc/330308http://drop.sc/330309I agree with HideR on early - game and mid game, and we are almost there as well (I feel). You can be very aggressive with vultures early game vs zerg to great effect, but you might have to open one-base for it to work. Puccini was awesome at this. This is ofc map-dependend as well. That is actually another big point. We need the tools but we also need the maps. Some maps are much more harass friendly than others. Nydus on tier one (reworked...) hmmm we'll think about that...
I think early game tvz is fine if terran opens vultures as puccini often did. However, then he will transition into mech as bio + vultures have bad synergy. So I would like to see a bit more early game action in TvZ bio, and nydus tier 1 could be one of these cool small differences where Starbow differentiates itself from BW and Sc2 (like planetary cooldown and siegepick up dropships which I am totally in love with btw).
My plan is that that the supply cap is increased as the game progress. So once you reach lair the supply cap either automatically goes up or you have to purchase a cheap upgrade to increase it to 30-50 or something like that. Then perhaps at hive tech it gets increased from 50-70.
This will make it much less all'insh than it is in Sc2, and in return we will be able to see it a lot more action in a cool way (where you won't instaloose if you dont kill it in time, but just get a bit behind).
I noticed that losing an expansion, it is a great loss for this the currently games are death ball vs death ball. Players can not afford to lose a base. I want to propose a possible solution.
I actualy don't think "deathballs" vs "deahtballs" is that big of a problem in most situations. It kinda depends on how you define the term.
But IMO the most important thing in a game is that it has as much action as possible. Breaking the deathball by incentivizing multitasking is one way of creating action. Another approach is to make a game where players will battle each other constantly. The latter approach can also be awesome even thogh it doens't involve a lot of mutltasking and therefore can be catergorized as "deathball'ish". However as that approach has constant army trading I don't think its really a true deathball'ish problem.
So I rather ask the question; Is there times in each matchups where the game is too stalemale'ish/too little action?
TvZ Early game was one situation. What about the other matchups?
|
I was reading back in the thread, and a long time ago (back when stim duration was shorter), you, Hider suggested we give stim to medic. What do you guys think about this? I don't think it's gamebreaking, just makes terran more mobile and gives them to save medics after a fight. I feel like that would be one step to making bio viable in pvt.
As it stands, blink stalker chargelot is more mobile than mm. Additionally I would love to see 2 or more of groups dancing around the edge of creep and killing creep tumors, (with a firebat to thrwart lings), backing off when hydra lurker shows up.
@boring early game situations: lack of viable of earlier pressure bio (pushes that can still pressure if opponent scouts) pushes in zvt and tvp. Solution: nerf scouting? Adding observatory req to robo fac to delay observers, lowering slow-ovie speed.
|
Medic does currently have Stim. I think it's pointless and nonsensical, personally.
|
On May 04 2013 10:52 Chronopolis wrote:
I was reading back in the thread, and a long time ago (back when stim duration was shorter), you, Hider suggested we give stim to medic. What do you guys think about this? I don't think it's gamebreaking, just makes terran more mobile and gives them to save medics after a fight. I feel like that would be one step to making bio viable in pvt.
As it stands, blink stalker chargelot is more mobile than mm. Additionally I would love to see 2 or more of groups dancing around the edge of creep and killing creep tumors, (with a firebat to thrwart lings), backing off when hydra lurker shows up.
@boring early game situations: lack of viable of earlier pressure bio (pushes that can still pressure if opponent scouts) pushes in zvt and tvp. Solution: nerf scouting? Adding observatory req to robo fac to delay observers, lowering slow-ovie speed.
MnM pressures z, vultures can pressure P, what exactly is wrong?
|
On May 04 2013 12:34 decemberscalm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2013 10:52 Chronopolis wrote:
I was reading back in the thread, and a long time ago (back when stim duration was shorter), you, Hider suggested we give stim to medic. What do you guys think about this? I don't think it's gamebreaking, just makes terran more mobile and gives them to save medics after a fight. I feel like that would be one step to making bio viable in pvt.
As it stands, blink stalker chargelot is more mobile than mm. Additionally I would love to see 2 or more of groups dancing around the edge of creep and killing creep tumors, (with a firebat to thrwart lings), backing off when hydra lurker shows up.
@boring early game situations: lack of viable of earlier pressure bio (pushes that can still pressure if opponent scouts) pushes in zvt and tvp. Solution: nerf scouting? Adding observatory req to robo fac to delay observers, lowering slow-ovie speed.
MnM pressures z, vultures can pressure P, what exactly is wrong?
Any early "real" pushes in tvp and tvz are got darn awful because perfect scouting can be done every game, with that early early observer. There's not much of poking around the front, looking for clues like there was in bw. So I was thinking, since hydras and gateway units are relatively resilient against mm, we could make the pushes viable by making scouting harder.
@Hider
I think one of the reasons why aggression isn't' possible against terran, is most of the openings are fairly safe, precisely because all-ins will kill any greedy builds. Also because you constitute 33% of the terrans on NA, and you always play safe.
At first I thought the nydus worm a gimmicky idea, that was going to see too much play. However, it would give a lot more meaning to in-base sim-city. Also, atm, there is not much benifit for zerg to build a few units versus none. With the nydus network, zergs can choice to power very hard with almost no units, or make some units but still get a threat potential with them using nydus worm. This is similiar to the greedy 1 gateway robo take-a-third protoss style.
You can make the cost of each nydus network expensive, like 200 100 or 200 200, but make each nydus worm cheap, like 50/50. Each nydus network raises the maximum number of concurrent nydus worms by one.
|
Nerfing the observer will have so many other unfortunate consequences like having no way to deal with early banshee.
Early pressure as Bio in TvZ is important even if it is easily shut down and maybe not too action-packed.
1. It keeps you opponent honest.
2. It forces out lings / sunkens / queens.
You just have to be very careful and never go so far that you can't retreat if you suspect a lot of zerglings (your scv can see more than you think sometimes, gas timings, number of drones etc...).
Terran can also now go for a fairly early reaper harass vs zerg that transitions nicely into bio.
I also just played a game Vs Azelja where he opens up reaper harass into vulture harass into banshee harass into standard bio / tank / SV and he RAPED me. It worked like a charm, and was very action packed (and one-sided...  )
I don't think TvZ lacks early game harass from terran at least. But maybe it does from zerg. I am trying to find out how safe cc first really is vs Zerg if zerg is trying to punish it with agression (and not with an extra expansion) like a baneling bust or fast lurkers. Maybe rework banelings + some new nerfed version of a hatch-tech nydus can make things exciting 
For PvZ, don't forget many one-base protoss openings can be quite deadly as Puccini has showed many times. No need to go auto FFE
|
On May 04 2013 15:43 Xiphias wrote:Nerfing the observer will have so many other unfortunate consequences like having no way to deal with early banshee. Early pressure as Bio in TvZ is important even if it is easily shut down and maybe not too action-packed. 1. It keeps you opponent honest. 2. It forces out lings / sunkens / queens. You just have to be very careful and never go so far that you can't retreat if you suspect a lot of zerglings (your scv can see more than you think sometimes, gas timings, number of drones etc...). Terran can also now go for a fairly early reaper harass vs zerg that transitions nicely into bio. I also just played a game Vs Azelja where he opens up reaper harass into vulture harass into banshee harass into standard bio / tank / SV and he RAPED me. It worked like a charm, and was very action packed (and one-sided... ) I don't think TvZ lacks early game harass from terran at least. But maybe it does from zerg. I am trying to find out how safe cc first really is vs Zerg if zerg is trying to punish it with agression (and not with an extra expansion) like a baneling bust or fast lurkers. Maybe rework banelings + some new nerfed version of a hatch-tech nydus can make things exciting For PvZ, don't forget many one-base protoss openings can be quite deadly as Puccini has showed many times. No need to go auto FFE
I don't really consider pressure as action. Pressure is just what is it; Making sure your opponent isn't playing greedy. But if he isn't playing greedy, then he should have 2-3 crawlers up which means neither player can attack efficiently at the time being.
And the terran can't keep pressuring forever. In BW he might have been able to as the terran didn't have to take a somewhat quick 3rd, which means he could continue producing units while teching up to SV's. In Starbow the terran gets a weaker army at some point which means he needs to go back and defend while setting up his 3rd. At that stage in the game, "action" will only occur if the zerg opened mutalisks. If he didn't then the terran is kinda forced to turtle untill he gets irradiate + Siege tanks (as they are a must against heavy lurker play as you won't have enough SV's at that stage).
If we look at BW, TvZ early game kinda suffered from the same problem as there was no real action in the first 10 minutes if the terran opened bio. However, the zerg would often open mutalisks which kinda reduced the severeity of the problem and the terran could begin his bio + SV attacks earlier due to not investing in a 3rd.
Compare this to Sc2 where terran can open reaper into hellions (+mines) into marines + hellions + medivacs. Its just a never ending stream of action which is why I love watching TvZ Hots. The problem with that matchup though is that zerg really has no way of being the aggressor without all'ing, luckily Starbow doesn't have that problem, but currently it comes at the expense of having less action.
Regarding vulture openings into bio. I think in order to asses whether that's a surprise-cheesy opening or whether its actually a viable opening that we could see become standard in the game, then one answer needs to be questioned; Why would that opening be viable if it wasn't viable in BW?
Personally I try to figure out what becomes the "standard" play once the game gets figured, and then propose balance/design changes based on that "vision". I feel like that's a neccesary approach as the game doesn't have enough active players to develop the metagame quickly enough. So that is why I think a theoretical discussion is very much needed when arguing whether something is viable or not. Refferring to one or two games as an example isn't the best way of designing the game as chances are that one of you went suboptimal builds or made mistakes that had an influential impact on the game.
But even if I am wrong and there are noticeable differences between BW and Starbow which makes vultures --> bio openings viable ("worst case scenario"), I don't think it will make the game worse if the suggested nydus Network is implemented? All it does is to give zerg an unique way of harassing the terran player and dealing a bit of damage.
For PvZ, don't forget many one-base protoss openings can be quite deadly as Puccini has showed many times. No need to go auto FFE
I think standard plays should have early game action as well. It shouldn't just be onebases (too all-in based) that has potential for action in the first 10 minutes of the game. Assuming both players play standard/solid/optimal, I want them to be incentivized to harass the opponent in the early parts of the game. That is why I wrote that I want early game action to be applid through the low risk/low reward concept.
I think one of the reasons why aggression isn't' possible against terran, is most of the openings are fairly safe, precisely because all-ins will kill any greedy builds. Also because you constitute 33% of the terrans on NA, and you always play safe.
At first I thought the nydus worm a gimmicky idea, that was going to see too much play. However, it would give a lot more meaning to in-base sim-city. Also, atm, there is not much benifit for zerg to build a few units versus none. With the nydus network, zergs can choice to power very hard with almost no units, or make some units but still get a threat potential with them using nydus worm. This is similiar to the greedy 1 gateway robo take-a-third protoss style.
You can make the cost of each nydus network expensive, like 200 100 or 200 200, but make each nydus worm cheap, like 50/50. Each nydus network raises the maximum number of concurrent nydus worms by one.
I actually don't think it needs to be that expensive. A 200/200 investment where you can only deal a small amount of damage damage would almost never be optimal to produce in the early game. I want to design it in such a way that we see it in 20-50% of zerg openings, and 50-75% of the time the zerg is able to get the nydus networm out.
So let me discuss a bit how we can influence a few varaibles in order to get the desired probabilies.
Getting the zerg player to use it 20-50% of the time
The total cost of the early game network (tech + worm) should be somewhat equal to the average damage that the zerg player deals to the opponent subtracted by the cost of the investment. Below is an example;
- Cost of the tech is 100/50
-Each nydus channel costs 25/25
-The zerg can get 6 lings through a channel (3 supply cap)
- Lets also assume that he cuts a bit into his own economy as he gets 2-3 fewer drones than he would otherwise have gotton. Lets quantifiy that loss to have a value of 50 minerals (that the drones could have mined if lings hadn't been produced).
That implies total investment cost of 175/75.
So here is one way the zerg player can make the investment worthwhile (assuming 1 gas harvested = 1 mineral harvested) ; Kill 2 marines. Kill 3 scvs. Take up 50 minerals in less mining time of the terran player (as he needs to pull scvs) = 50+150 + 50.
But that is the perfect scenario for the zerg player as it assumes the terran doesn't kill the network before its up, and that the zerg player loses 0 lings. So given those costs, chances are that the investment wouldn't be efficient.
There are two ways to increase the ROI of the nydus investment;
1) Increase potential damage (increase supply cap).
2) Reduce cost of investment.
I rule out the former as it will increase the importance of killing the network before it gets up. This means that it will reduce the second desired probability to below 50% as terrans will choose less greedy builds and always get enough units out so they can patrol their bases.
So instead, the cost of the investment needs to come down a bit more. I'd say it needs to come down to 75/50, 75/25 or 50/50.
Now assuming that you can have one channel per network technology, a problem arises with the latter suggestion. It now becomes easier to afford multiple network technologies (so you can have multiple channels) which means that it will be stronger as an allin. Therefore I suggest to reduce the amount of networks techs you can have to 1 at tier 1, 2 at tier 2, 3 at tier 3.
|
Bug fix published on EU and NA
Change log:
+ Show Spoiler +
Observers now flash red
EMP now effects energy
Xiphias pass: fixed guysers and ramp removed at the natural
Banelings now gain speed from the upgrade
carriers now autocast by default interceptors
Viper nest hotkey is now v
Scourge and Corsair speed is now 4.25 from 3.75 (muta speed)
Burrow is hatch tech
Archons are now armored
Nerve Jammer now correctly displays the range bubble
Scourge now correctly costs 25/75 for a pair
Weapon upgrades now effect corsairs and arbiters
Purple Storm now displays its minimap
And I'm exhausted now ^^ have a good night, pm me any bugs you guys encounter.
|
Xiphias;
Regarding bio tvp viability. Lets discuss a bit on how we want to proceed. You said you don't wanna see bio be viable all game long and I kinda agree with that, but it depends on the definition. For instance pure bio isn't really viable all game long in Sc2. In TvT you will lose at some point in the game against a heavy turtling mech player, but due to the threat of teching to BC's with a stronger economy the mech player can't actually turtle as heavily as he would like too.
In TvP I think late game is much much more difficult for terran (and they also get vikings wiht collosus)
In TvZ terran goes mines/hellbats along with bio.
So there is no matchup where it takes an equal amount of skill to win with pure MMM in the late game. Let me discuss below how I would like to see each bio play be applied in each matchup.
TvT = Bio vs Mech is probably the most exciting think to play and watch in Sc2. Its extremely action packed and even though most of the action comes from the bio player, the terran player also has ways to harass/attack the opponent. I would actually say that this matchup kinda reminds of TvP in BW, where the bio playstyles somewhat resembles the protoss playstyle in BW (carrier = BC, recall = doomdrop, warp prism = medivacs, the counter to a 3-4 base push is to delay the mech army and/or counterattack). Only difference is the lack of Stasis Field.
So I would actually very much like to see bio be somewhat similar in strenght in TvT as in Sc2. The maurauder isn't being reimplemented into the game, so bio needs to become viable in a slightly different way. But the core concept of the mobile strenght of bio vs the immobile but cost efficient mech is extremely exicting IMO.
TvZ = I wanna replicate how BW worked in this matchup (though I would want to see more early game action but that's antother discussion). Basically I really enjoy watching bio openings into mech transitions late game in BW where the terran starts out as the early/midgame aggressor, and then in the late game the zerg player drops all the time and everywhere as terran builds up his mech army.
In Starbow bio + tank might actually be too strong in the lategame. Personally I feel very comfortable playing that allgame long. While bio + tank can be somewhat entertaining to watch I still prefer the mech-transition neccesity for two reasons;
1) It is less deathball based. With bio + tank you will have all your units in a clump, with just 1-2 dropships flying around. When you tranistion into mech you will need to spread your tanks out over all of your bases.
2) It adds a new dimension to the game. If tank + bio + sv is viable all game long then midgame willl feel very similar to late game.
If you agree with me on this one, then I think I will make another post later on discussing how to incentivize this kind of metagame shift.
TvP = I want bio to be viable in the sense that you can only win if you have; A) Fantastic multitasking and/or B) Fantastic Micro.
As the game progresses it should become increasingly difficult to do well in battles (with perfect micro you can at best trade even). However on the other hand I believe bio should be more mobile than the protoss army so you can have a better economy. This encourages constant action from the terran player as he wants to trade armies throughout the whole game.
Most players will after they have established a stronger economy choose to transition into mech, however if you are Marineking you can continue playing bio all game long.
What are your thoughts here Xiphias?
|
Well if i may join the discussion because it is a recurring topic that i have interest in(as i am terran in SC2). Been busy with my exams lately which is why i have been missing lately.
The core issues of Bio vs Tanks:
I say Bio vs Tanks because to my knowledge Marines does alright vs Vultures and Goliaths and even if they don't that is easy to adjust. It is actually quite simple, even if Bio can run around circles from the tank army, there is no way to engage it. Marines just don't work against Sieged tanks, pros in SC2 have already long since confirmed that so not much reason why it would in Starbow. There really is no way to avoid this issue, if Bio is to be viable vs tanks it needs a way to kill the tanks. So here is some suggestions for solitions:
Solution 1:
Something Maradaur-ish.
You have repeatatly shouted that the Maraduar will not be implemented in any version i have heard that. But if Bio is to be able to engage tanks then Bio needs something that can do something similar. My idea is this:
Haywire round:
A targeted ability that does Terrible Terrible damage to a single mechanical unit from a decent range to booth. I am thinking 3 shotting a tank from the range of 6 for a start. The most obvious unit to get this ability would be the firebat since it currently have little roles in the matchups where this ability matters. It is kinda a simpler version of my Marauder/Firebat hybrid idea.
Pros:
This ability if probably designed would be bloody scary in the early game as it should be for mech. The treat of an early 3 firebat push to snipe the first tank and then go rolling in the mineral line should keep the Meching player honest and awake. And maybe give the bio player an expansion advantage. This is a little how Bio vs Mech works in SC2 and how TvP seems to work in Starbow.
As scary as it is the Early game, as useless it might end up being in the later game. Unless your name is Flash good luck trying to issue 15 shots to take out 5 tanks in the same time they have brutally murdered all your very armored Firebats that got a massive range dissadvantage. It would(and should) still be useful in sniping outlying tanks.
Negs:
Might be scary to balance TvP around this.
Solution 2
Make the sieged tanks unsieged.
Basicly an ability like EMP would force tanks to unsiege. Sieged tanks are incrediable strong vs Bio but unsieged they are actually the biggest joke since North koreas latest treats(okay that wasn't that long ago). If Bio were given a tool that could do that it would once again keep the meching player awake and force him to take precautions. Whether it would be through detection if Ghosts could do this or anti air if it was on the SVs EMP it would be something that would force the meching player to expand less and be smarter with his assaults.
Pros:
Unlike Lockdown(the intended bio counter to tanks i guess), this ability will not strip the mech player his ability to react. If he get a dropship he can evacuate some of the tanks and salvage the situration. I don't think Stand and fight however should be a viable option if all the tanks gets hit by this and the bio army rolls. Retreat and regroup would be possible and then fix what went wrong with the detection or the AA.
Cons:
It will kinda be a special Rule which i guess tends to be lame. I don't know if it should affect other mechanical units abilities like Blink but it would be a complicated ability regardless. Also doesn't fix bio TvP at all.
|
I think it does make a lot of sense to give the ghost some kind of "anti-siege" thing. Kinda like how Stasis works, though it shouldn't be so punishing as stasis can be.
Btw I think OC's are too expensive. At 150 minerals its almost never worth to get them before your saturated on 2 bases, and at that point calldown scv's really doesn't matter. At 100 minerals I felt like it became a much more interesting decisions on when to get it.
I wonder though, could Nuke do that job. We do see that once a while in Sc2, but its not really that good in most situations. I think a few small changes could make us see that more often;
1) Reduce the time from 20 to 12 seconds from the nuke is launched till it explodes.
2) Reduce AOE by 25-50%.
3) Reduce cost from 100/100 to 50/50 (or something like that).
4) Reduce research time quite signifcantly.
With these changes nuke will be much less of a "i hope my oponent fucks up", and instead it will be quite good as a siege breaker, and it will probably also be usefull in other matchups.
|
On May 04 2013 21:18 Hider wrote:
I think it does make a lot of sense to give the ghost some kind of "anti-siege" thing. Kinda like how Stasis works, though it shouldn't be so punishing as stasis can be.
Btw I think OC's are too expensive. At 150 minerals its almost never worth to get them before your saturated on 2 bases, and at that point calldown scv's really doesn't matter. At 100 minerals I felt like it became a much more interesting decisions on when to get it.
I wonder though, could Nuke do that job. We do see that once a while in Sc2, but its not really that good in most situations. I think a few small changes could make us see that more often;
1) Reduce the time from 20 to 12 seconds from the nuke is launched till it explodes.
2) Reduce AOE by 25-50%.
3) Reduce cost from 100/100 to 50/50 (or something like that).
4) Reduce research time quite signifcantly.
With these changes nuke will be much less of a "i hope my oponent fucks up", and instead it will be quite good as a siege breaker, and it will probably also be usefull in other matchups.
I assume you mean Build time instead of Research time. Terrans already did the manhattan project. It certainly could work but as it is right now it would be too unreliable a tool to use even with cloak when the ghost have to be like one inch from the firing range of a tank just to make the AOE reach the tanks. I would look at maybe making the max deployment range 15 instead of 12?(is it that not sure). Along with some of the other changes. Needless to say you still need initial vision.
I also have a few ideas for adjustments to the Dropship:
HP increased to 200. Same as Overlords and Warprisms and without Medivac healing nothing warrants this Health reduction.
Ultra space efficiancy: Terran engineers took their Tetris course and have figuring out how to make any bio unit fill just one seat. Ghosts now need to hold their guns instead of giving it a seat of its own.
Neosteel Dropships: After the faillure of Neosteel Bunkers, one Engineers got the idea to deploy this tech on the dropships for additional Seats.
|
I like idea of 'desiegeing.' spell for ghost. To make it more versatile maybe it could also unburrow and decloak units?
|
On May 04 2013 21:56 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2013 21:18 Hider wrote:
I think it does make a lot of sense to give the ghost some kind of "anti-siege" thing. Kinda like how Stasis works, though it shouldn't be so punishing as stasis can be.
Btw I think OC's are too expensive. At 150 minerals its almost never worth to get them before your saturated on 2 bases, and at that point calldown scv's really doesn't matter. At 100 minerals I felt like it became a much more interesting decisions on when to get it.
I wonder though, could Nuke do that job. We do see that once a while in Sc2, but its not really that good in most situations. I think a few small changes could make us see that more often;
1) Reduce the time from 20 to 12 seconds from the nuke is launched till it explodes.
2) Reduce AOE by 25-50%.
3) Reduce cost from 100/100 to 50/50 (or something like that).
4) Reduce research time quite signifcantly.
With these changes nuke will be much less of a "i hope my oponent fucks up", and instead it will be quite good as a siege breaker, and it will probably also be usefull in other matchups. I assume you mean Build time instead of Research time. Terrans already did the manhattan project. It certainly could work but as it is right now it would be too unreliable a tool to use even with cloak when the ghost have to be like one inch from the firing range of a tank just to make the AOE reach the tanks. I would look at maybe making the max deployment range 15 instead of 12?(is it that not sure). Along with some of the other changes. Needless to say you still need initial vision. I also have a few ideas for adjustments to the Dropship: HP increased to 200. Same as Overlords and Warprisms and without Medivac healing nothing warrants this Health reduction. Ultra space efficiancy: Terran engineers took their Tetris course and have figuring out how to make any bio unit fill just one seat. Ghosts now need to hold their guns instead of giving it a seat of its own. Neosteel Dropships: After the faillure of Neosteel Bunkers, one Engineers got the idea to deploy this tech on the dropships for additional Seats.
At 20 seconds (Sc2) its a unreliable tool as a mech player with decent reactions can unsiege and siege up and kill ghosts. At 12 seconds, however, it is ridiclously difficult thing as a mech'ing terran to do. Cloak isn't even neccesary as the ghost nuke range is longer than the siege range.
Think about this; It takes 3 seconds to unsiege + 3 siege seconds 2 siege + like 2 seconds to move the tank into correct positioning. THat leaves 4 sc2 seconds to find out where the nuke is landing.
And no matter what the bio player is forcing the mech player to unsiege some of his tanks. So I actually think this is a very reliable way of breaking a tank line.
I like idea of 'desiegeing.' spell for ghost. To make it more versatile maybe it could also unburrow and decloak units?
The reason I prefer making nuke the antisiege spell is it gives the opponent a chance to react after the ability has been casted. Instant abilities (like EMP) rewards 1-second micro.
And if all the unsiege ability does is to unsiege then it needs to be instant (other wise it would be very weak and niche oriented). So therefore I prefer that it both deals damage (like nuke does) and forces an unsiege rection.
|
I will write a more through answer when I have the time. Right now I just want you to remember that reapers + charges + matrix + good micro CAN break siege lines. I see no need for a 'maurader' atm.
|
On May 04 2013 22:28 Xiphias wrote:
I will write a more through answer when I have the time. Right now I just want you to remember that reapers + charges + matrix + good micro CAN break siege lines. I see no need for a 'maurader' atm.
Replays or it didn't happen. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
