[A] Starbow - Page 332

The trouble with a lower range marauder is it just becomes like a roach with stim then, doesn't it, only better vs armoured and a fair bit worse vs other types?



I didn't say anything about pure gateway beating pure bio.
I talked about cost efficiency.
If Immortals are meant to be good against Marauders, you CANNOT HAVE Marauders being more cost efficient against Immortals, let alone WITHOUT taking stim into account.
150/50 in marauders, without stim, should not beat the intended direct counter unit, the Immortal, which for the most part should be LESS cost efficient than the marauder, just not against other armoured ground units.

Marauder = somewhat specialised in anti-ground, more mobile with stim, really jacks up the DPS with stim
Immortal = really speciailsed in anti-ground, still not stritcly TERRIBLE vs ground but should always be cost inefficient versus things like marines, zerglings, zealots.

- Marines and marauders are/should both be good (cost-efficient) against Stalkers.
- Marines>Immortals
- Zealots>Marines & Marauders with no micro, but micro helps to balance it, at least for marines
- Higher DPS for Terran means generally better for harassment/drop play
- Reapers are/probably should be good against Zealots

Overall, my idea is Bio>pure gateway.
You made some big (+weird) assumptions about what I must be thinking when I expect Immortals to be cost-efficient against the one kind of thing they are meant to be good against and wrote a bunch that's not really related to my actual point, unfortunately. :p
Then there's this:

Neither of those are to do with any "2×(1/2)>1×1 rule that you claim exists (and maybe it does).
That is simply to do with some units being intended to be cost-efficient against others.
BW Hydralisks, in EQUAL COST are meant to be good against dragoons, but they cost less and are weaker as single units, so you obviously need more. Making more costs more resources, but because they are cost-efficient against dragoons, you need an overall smaller amount of resources worth of hydralisks to deal with the dragoons.
I don't think that 'rule' exists, I believe it would be more of a trend if anything.
It's more just
"x" amount of unit type #1 intended to be good vs unit type #2 > same resources in unit type #2.


http://starbow.wikia.com/wiki/Marauder says it is only 10hp, but maybe that just needs correcting.
I agree with Zaphod that if Marauders are in the game, 10 HP for stim is too cheap. It was always 20 HP in SC2 anyway. Maybe stim only boosted movement for Marauders once upon a time in Starbow?


Hmm, it's still about cost equivalent, I think, if lurkers always hit 2 immortals, which the slow movement speed of immortals helps with, but on the other hand, maybe the range difference between lurkers and immortals isn't enough to actually allow them to regularly hit more than 1.
I'm not sure if the low bonus vs armoured warrants the extra gas cost and -1 range.
As they are, would you prefer just 2 stalkers to 1 Immortal and 1 Zealot?
Side note: Warp Prisms are too fragile.



Really? I still need to watch two of the replays Kabel uploaded but Null Ward doesn't seem that strong to me.
The splash is partly mitigated by splitting but more-so by it just not seeming to hit much often.
Set up many and sure, but if you see the Sentinels in time, shouldn't you have medics? Matrix is REALLY good, isn't it? 150 life for 50 energy?
I can see it not working so well if it's much easier to have many Sentinels than enough medics to protect many marines (due to the cooldown of Matrix), I wouldn't have thought it was so much easier though.
If the sheer HP, range and substantial speed advantage of Sentinels over marines is too much, maybe reduce the range of Sentinels to 4, to ensure they can't kite marines? :S Keep in mind Sentinels use 3 supply though.
They can probably barely kite though in which case the HP might be what is too high (IF you're saying Sentinels are just too good against bio even despite Matrix).
If Matrix is actually researched by default (Wiki says it is), it could be made a technology at a tech lab (on barracks obv.) rather than armoury, if the latter idea delays it too much.


Stalkers are not a lot better than Marauders vs other units, except they can hit air units. That is one on one, NOT cost for cost.
That means cost for cost, Stalkers ARE much worse vs most units and that doesn't even take stim into account!
Stalkers should be similarly cost efficent before you count stim, or even less cost efficient, but they're so much more expensive, they really should beat a non-stimmed marauder 1 on 1 if marauders only cost 57% of the resourcesor 55% if you count gas as double value (kind of good rule in SC2, but I'm not sure about Starbow).
You can easily make marauders pretty good vs stalkers without needing them that strong (and making them have 4 range just feels like roaches to me personally).

5 range for marines from the start could work but hydralisks only have 4 and might not need to be THAT bad against marines.


No real gas dump yeah, and sound good. ;P

Marines dealing a bit less to light - seems so far from classic marines but I've often considered it might be appropriate, but I wonder if zealots and zerglings might actually be too strong vs marines then, personally.


Gyaahh, if you make it too slow and long ranged it gets too much like a Warp Prism reliant Reaver and toss already have one of those.
I think Immortals are more intersting as something that walks into detected lurkers and blast them heavily, faring well so long as they don't take too much splash. 6 range I can agree with, but I think the micro for an Immortal should be different to that of a Reaver.
Given the name, at least, they shouldn't just be "kite and die", not that you were saying that, but I believe they should be able to take a beating and easily dish out a lot of damage too, but only to what they're meant to be particularly good against (armoured). The old Hardened Shield is sort of back in the form of a Sentinel's Safeguard.
If you make it slower, you could end up with defensive set-ups of
Safeguard + Warp Prism + Reaver or Immortal going up and down, using it like an elevator, which might be interesting, but I'm not sure it fits the role of the Immortal. *Shrug*


Hmm, I see fast zealots as tanks and big damage dealers while stalkers grant more reliable damage output (range, kiting ability, harrassment potential with blink especially) and not "specialists" against non-armoured or armoured, but rather all-rounders like zealots, but for different utility. They synergise well with each other without Stalkers needing to be anti-light.
Currently, I feel like Stalkers might be a little too strong versus light and medium and I think 12 damage would be more appropriate than 14, especially suitable for ensuring they're not too good versus zerglings, marines and hydralisks, all of which are meant to be more cost efficient versus Stalker, but currently it looks like a critical mass of stalkers can really make (too?) good use of the 6 range and 14 damage.


Now see this I don't get. I just showed that marauders should be cost efficient VS immortals (similar minerals, but a lot less gas) BEFORE even considering stim.
Without stim, Marauders vs Zealots are worse than Roaches vs Zealots but you're recommending immortals instead of zealots despite that, purely due to kiting, but immortals are too slow to really stop themselves being picked off and either
1 - have only 5 range anyway, like marines with upgrades (or your marines with your suggested 5 initial range)
2 - have more range but are slower, as per your suggestion, likely to slow them down vs the bio, wouldn't it?

If you have Sentinels, you can place Null Wards, which can keep marines at bay to prevent kiting. They can be minor discouragement to forces composed of less fragile units but stronger discouragement to terran committing to a big attack without tanks/matrix/other and to trying to kite zealots etc.

I just don't see why a bio terran couldn't just stim and a-move over a stalker immortal protoss unless
1 - stim lasts an even shorter period of time than it should
2 - terran actually has production issues where, with a good economic set-up, they somehow can't have made enough production facilities in time...but in that case maybe the/some protoss units might need to take longer.


So untrue.
- Again, Immortals are inefficient VS marauders.
- High supply cost is only as much of an issue as it is to an SC2 roach, only they can stim and are currently designed to be excessively cost efficient vs stalkers, another 2 supply unit so...NOPE.

Want Marauders in the game to ensure some bio unit deals a lot to Stalkers?
- Marines already deal about the same damage to armoured per supply/cost as marauders anyway
Want Marauders in the game to ensure Zealots are good against some barracks units?
- Can apply the -1 damage nerf vs Light to Marines
Want Marauders in the game to tank more?
- Oh, hey! What's this Matrix spell?
Bio needs a gas sink/dump?
- Medics could cost 50/50 instead of 75/25.

Phew! The EffOrt!.


Well stimmed Marauders don't even need to aim in order to kite units, while zealots should probably be split a bit against bio so that you can potentially surrounded (with speedy zealots) and reapers can have that area of effect, Molotov Cocktail upgrade to deal a bit of splash vs light to encourage zealots, so I would say zealots and their weakenesses are much more attractive to them game than marauders.


Ha...ha.....SC2 popular opinion is that they improved the game, hey? If you're going to make statements like that and want simple yes/no answers, I think most would agree that they didn't.

Yeah, for me Light or Medium (latter being your choice) make a lot more sense to me for the unit, 3 shots for all non-terran workers is better than 2 (SCV imba! XD), being good against Marauders, Immortals, Lurkers, Siege Tanks etc.


Oh puh-lease, the SC2 banshee has 140 hp instead of 120, I just requested that the armour be taken away from it and suggested increasing the cooldown!
It's just not so much of a nerf as you would probably like, because people weren't using it much when it had 4 range (which makes sense) and it didn't prove very useful.
It has less life, less range and I suggested considering a slower cooldown for the banshee (1.5), just no slower than 1.75 and I don't think we should try 1.75 *YET*.
For the banshee to be an interesting unit in the game, allowing it to fulfil a stealthy, worker and key strategic unit-sniping (siege tank, HT, Immortal, Lurker) bother of a thing would be ideal.
My concern about the speed in the case of the banshee was that even with detection, it may be too hard to catch. 2.75 isn't slow, 2.95 really isn't. You can leave the speed, but if it proves too much, 2.95 might be a more appropriate buff to its speed. Just my opinion.

Is it possible to make it that you CAN warp in HT, but that there is a delay (30/45/60 seconds? Whatever seems appropriate) before they can cast Psionic Storm?
If you can make such a delay only apply to warped in HT, it stops people being limited to only being able to warp in DT if they want a front-line archon, while preventing HT with storm researched and 5 energy from being able to cast immediately after warping in.

I'd personally much rather Sentinels remain at the Robotics Facility even if Immortal are there too. Maybe SG openings might end up more popular vs zerg and Robotics vs Terran, but that's not so bad, it'd just be a build trend, not a rule.

Removing the +4 vs armoured from Lurkers sounds fine to me, better than changing anything else about lurkers at least for now.
That said, taking Lurkers back to 150 life (they are at 160 currently) would mean that 2 Psi Storms on a lurker, one after the other (*Fingers Crossed* situation..) will kill the lurker, whereas right now, they'd most likely regenerate one, which is a bit harsh. Alternatively, Psi Storm could deal just over 80 damage.
EDIT: Wiki was just wrong it seems, I'll change it to 150 there.

WIKI: Safeguard radius not listed, I don't know what it is.

Yeah, protoss gateway units are sort of like Red Mages (might not get the reference), by design they feel more all-rounded than bio except minus the strength they would need to work.
If there was a scale of strength from 1.0-10.0 for their different strengths, it's sort of like gateway units get middling numbers across the board, but the average turns out below the expected '5'. Just my analogy. :p

Hmm, I think people are generally against adding more miss chances and we do already have bunkers in the game for similar purposes, although they require more preparation, but maybe that's not a bad thing?
The Matrix spell should really help tanking power for bio anyway.

I do enjoy the higher movement speed, since it seems to make room for more micro and hit-and-run attacks. But some players have reported the Banshee being broken/too good/too hard to deal with. So I consider to do this:

- Banshee dmg lowered to 2x9, 2x12 vs armored. (It currently has 2x10, 2x12 vs armored)
- Remove the Armored class and remove the 1 starting Armor
- Increase Cloak cooldown from 15 seconds to 30 seconds. (The cloak still lasts 15 seconds.)

This would make them 3-shot workers. The extra damage vs armored units is there to make them more useful vs Immortal, Lurkers, Siege tanks and other slow units. So it gains some more combat utility... (People said they sucked in combat earlier.)

I added the Armored requirement a while ago to make certain units better vs it. (Like Stalkers.) But that might not be necessary anymore since some unit bonuses are now different. So I consider to just let it be "mechanical."

I fix the priority between Gateway/Warp gate, so it is easier to control both kinds of buildings. Immortal and HT will remain only at the Gateway. I will probably change it in the future, and I am looking at some different options and suggestions from some of you.

I added +4 damage vs armored units, when Marauder/Immortal were introduced in the game a week ago. The reason was to make sure these units were not OP vs Lurker fields. But that does not seem to be the case at all. In fact, Lurkers look insane atm. So I consider to remove this bonus damage vs armored units.

Remove so it is not Armored anymore. This would make them stronger mainly vs masses of Hydras.

Give Warp Prism +20 shield.
Warp prisms seems to be made of paper. In a lot of combats, played by good players, the Warp prism and Reaver just dies.. Ofc it shall be fragile, and players must be careful, but isn´t the Warp Prism just too weak atm?
80 HP, 60 shield. (Same as in BW.)
But since ground units like Hydras, Marines etc are more clumped up, smarter, and the DPS is more concentrated in a small area, it seems to be way easier to snipe it now, compared to how it was in BW. It is not even exciting to watch the Warp Prism die anymore.. It is so common and happens to all players all the time..

Build time decreased by 3 seconds, because Bio does indeed seem unable to keep up in production vs Protoss. This is a heated unit which players have many opinions about, both regarding the design and the stats. I will keep it as it is for now, simply because I wanna see it more in game before I do anything more with it.

Cost increased by 25 minerals.

I increase the amount of gas in each geyser by 500. It looks like gas are depleted much quicker than minerals at each base. It is common to see players having a high mineral income rate in the late game, but low gas income rate.

They still look very strong vs Protoss, mainly because P can not know if Z will go for a Baneling bust or not. Without Force Field, it is hard to defend vs it.. Hmm...

People say they are very strong, especially in TvP. Has that changed now when Immortals are in the game? (Which should own Goliaths.) Or are they too strong in other match-ups too?

Edit: I reduced dmg from 13 to 12.

Spider mines have always been tricky to get to work good. Here is how they work atm:
- When Spider mines are burrowing, they have lower attack priority than Vultures.
When Spider mines are burrowed, they have the same attack priority as other units.
This does two things:
1) If Vultures plant Spider mines on top of the enemy units, they will attack the Vultures, unless ordered to focus fire the Spider mines. If the Vultures just plant the mines on top of the enemy units, and then run away, the enemy units will auto-attack the mines.
2) As long as a player has detection, his ranged units will attack burrowed Spider mines as likely as other enemy units nearby.

When a Spider mine unburrows, it is "stunned" for 2 seconds. Then it moves towards the enemy and detonates.
This two second duration allows players to focus fire the Spider mines. (Which is hard, but Fen did it in a game yesterday.)
When the Spider mine moves towards the enemy units, it can not be attacked.

I made it like this because IF Spider mines can be attacked when they move towards the enemy army, a huge ball of ranged units can actually become immune vs Spider mines WITHOUT detection! If you have 10 clumped up Hydras, and 2-3 Spider mines pop up, the SC2 units are so smart and fast so they kill the mines immediately.

Standard Spider mines, as Blizzard made them in the SC2 editor, just detonated as soon as an enemy unist walked on them. (No room for remicro, mine drags or anything.)

I have never reached a solution I am 100% satisfied with. I have always felt I must pick between two evils.
Any ideas for improvement?

I am currently reworking in it so it becomes an attack instead of an ability. This solves the weird bug that STILL happens sometimes - Null ward attacks in the wrong direction. If it is an attack, it seems more reliable and hits more often, since it fires straight towards the target.

The problem is that I can not make players manually micro the Null ward. I would prefer if P can take control of the Null Ward and manually launch it at target location. This is hard to make because the Null Ward has a 8 second setup time. During this time, the Null Ward has its attack disabled, and no orders can be given to it. As soon as the 8 seconds end, the Null Ward will immediately attack nearby enemy units, and there is no time for the Protoss player to give it orders.

Not sure how to solve this.. Hmm...

Btw, what sounds and feels best ? Null Ward or Null Sphere? I need to decide on a name >.<