|
I noticed some things today I think needs fixing. Not balance, just annoying stuff.
- When casting Safeguard with the Sentinel, the preview shown on the ground is much smaller than the actual spell.
- The minerals on the natural on Squares of Starbow are too clumped together. There is a large row without opening in between, which is very bad if you are being bunker rushed beside them. (I'm looking at you, Hider).
- Gateways have priority over Warpgates when both are targeted at the same time. Why is that a problem?
+ Show Spoiler +Many people, including me, use a control group for warp gates instead of the default "W" warp-in. This is good for several reasons: When pressing the group you target all WGs, not only the ones ready. Then you can see when the next ones are ready.
Another bonus is to add unfinished gateways to the group, so it's much easier to change them to warp gates when they are done. And here comes the problem with GW prioriy over WG. When I want to warp in, I press the group and start spamming my zealots on the ground. But many times there are completed (unchanged) gateways in the group, so they start building zealots at home instead. Very annoying.
I see no reason to have gateways with priority over warp gates. Just change it back to default.
|
my question was meant to solid: i wrote wrong name
what u feel about the sc2 pathing?
|
@Economy
It depends what the changes are, and what they aim to fix. One critiscm Í´ve heard a lot is that players are forced to expand, since their bases run out of minerals so quickly. That can easily be fixed by increasing the minerals per mineral patch. If there are flaws in this system, that can not be fixed or tweaked with small changes, well.. I just prefer to look at the small stuff first.
So yes, I do hesitate to do something large and fundamental with the economy. Mainly because that would require a shit ton of additional work and play testing. But if I get some numbers, I will ofc take a look at them and share them in the thread. I also wonder if just maps, and the way bases are located, can be enough to improve it.
@Some minor things
@Medics
Shall they have Stim pack or not?
Good thing: It allows Bio to be more mobile
Bad thing: When Bio stims, the Medics start to heal each other instead of the fighting units.
You who play this actively have different views on this. Any advantages or disadvantages?
@Attributes
These are the attributes units in Starbow use: Biological, Mechanical, Light, Armored, Massive, Psionic, Structure and Hover
Some attacks deal more dmg vs certain types of attributes and so on.
The "problem" is that we have no name for a unit without any attribut, for example Hydralisk, Medic, Vulture, Mutalisk. They are not Light or Armored. They just... are.
I consider to make a new Armor class and just call it something.
(It will not really have any impact on the gameplay. Its just so we can talk about it, and it can become clear within the game, what units are good vs what.)
Ideas what to call that attribute?
Medium?
@Patching more in the future
I agree, Xiphias. IF more people start to play and explore this, more balance patches will surely be needed. But I will try to do it rarely, and I need to have better methods for data collecting (?), so we make "correct" balance changes. And that is surely hard. But I will not redesign anything, unless some huge flaws are found. Otherwise I fear I will just get even more PMs and suggestions over new spells, units and do this and do that. I don´t mind receieving ideas, but at some point this needs to be treated like a game and not like a piece of clay. Maybe there will be an expansion some day ^^
@Stasis
What? No difference? I need to check so XiAs work is in this file.
@Gateway priority
Oh, I thought it was normal. But I will double check it.
@Null Ward
XiA will help me complete it. Atm it is quite messy.
@Immortal and Reaver
Yeah they are probably not perfect atm, and will need number adjustements. MAYBE shall the Immortal have its Absorb ability. Just need to make it actually.. matter and add something good to the game.
@Abduct
It can not target massive units (Ultralisk, Archon, Carrier, BC). Not sure if that is good or bad.
Here is a thing: The Viper was regarded as a shitty unit for several weeks. People wanted me to buff it or redesign it since it was so bad. Now Dirtybag uses them a lot and now they almost look OP. Abduct and Ensnare are strong vs almost everything.
@Zerglings in PvZ
Is it just me, or do they feel like rubbish after the 10 minute mark?
Did lings work in mid - late game PvZ?
Just a metagame thing?
|
Shall they have Stim pack or not?
A speed button that is being activated by pressing "t" but doesn't cost any life would be awesome I think.
What? No difference? I need to check so XiAs work is in this file.
Well it is different, it just isn't apparent that there is a casting delay.
|
Wow you are fast!
I can let it have Stim, but it drains no life from the Medic. But then it probably needs a cooldown, otherwise it can be spammed forever... Unless it drains energy... Hmm
|
On August 24 2013 00:11 Kabel wrote:
Wow you are fast!
I can let it have Stim, but it drains no life from the Medic. But then it probably needs a cooldown, otherwise it can be spammed forever... Unless it drains energy... Hmm
ye, 10sec cooldown. Same duration stim lasts
|
On August 24 2013 00:11 Kabel wrote:
Wow you are fast!
I can let it have Stim, but it drains no life from the Medic. But then it probably needs a cooldown, otherwise it can be spammed forever... Unless it drains energy... Hmm
Hmm yeh, it could have like a 20-second cooldown. Not sure though what the advantage of spamming it is? You generally just want it with your army.
Btw, what was your plan for the immortal? Seems a bit UP atm vs tanks.
|
@Immortal
Here is what I have in mind: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=358#7154
Not sure if its realistic or not. Maybe Stalkers work just fine. No need for the Immortal. And I would prefer if it was useful.
@Medic Stim
Well, if it can be spammed non-stop, when Medics survive a combat and retreat home, they can stim the whole way back. Super quick ladies. But a cooldown will probably work better. Or energy cost? 10? 20?
|
K but based on my experiences playing with Stana it seems that terran can be insanely cost efficient vs protoss (over 5 games I had an average of being twice as cost efficient). Even though he didn't use stasis + maybe his engagements weren't particularly good, it still felt slightly too weak. Atm. immortals just barely do more DPS to tanks than stalkers (which really isn't a lot). Would you consider a DPS vs armored buff?
|
Stalkers deal 411 per minute vs armored targets.
Immortals deal 960 dmg per minute vs armored targets.
60 seconds / cooldown of the attack x the attack dmg = dmg per minute
If we break it down to damge per second, the Immortal deals 16 dmg per second vs armored targets. The Stalker deals 7.
How good does it have to be to become useful? What factor must be modified? Will even more dmg solve it? It needs more life? Cheaper? An ability? Range? Love?
|
#kabel
the unit tester is not the latest patch, so the arbiter is maybe old there. It probably is!
#hider
immortal do 40damage every 2.5sec
vs
stalker 14damage every 1.7sec
|
Sounds roughly like BW to me except Toss in BW takes half the map before some times Terran even has a third, plus a ton of gates to quickly remax.
|
On August 24 2013 00:38 Kabel wrote:
Stalkers deal 411 per minute vs armored targets.
Immortals deal 960 dmg per minute vs armored targets.
60 seconds / cooldown of the attack x the attack dmg = dmg per minute
If we break it down to damge per second, the Immortal deals 16 dmg per second vs armored targets. The Stalker deals 7.
How good does it have to be to become useful? What factor must be modified? Will even more dmg solve it?
Sounds more like a range issue to me.
|
@December
What does?
It feels like we are chatting now : D
Anyone wanna join us on EU and play?`I will be online in 15 minutes at least
|
On August 24 2013 00:38 Kabel wrote:
Stalkers deal 411 per minute vs armored targets.
Immortals deal 960 dmg per minute vs armored targets.
60 seconds / cooldown of the attack x the attack dmg = dmg per minute
If we break it down to damge per second, the Immortal deals 16 dmg per second vs armored targets. The Stalker deals 7.
How good does it have to be to become useful? What factor must be modified? Will even more dmg solve it? It needs more life? Cheaper? An ability? Range? Love?
ok stana's math must have been off ^^
|
Ah, noticed now the immortal has 2 attacks. Why does the immortal have 2 attacks? 
|
2 projectiles = 2 attacks = twice as much awesomeness
|
On August 24 2013 00:40 Foxxan wrote:
#kabel
the unit tester is not the latest patch, so the arbiter is maybe old there. It probably is!
#hider
immortal do 40damage every 2.5sec
vs
stalker 14damage every 1.7sec
it wasn't in the unit tester. it was in an actual game. and we tested it where we both starred at it and we couldn't figure out what was different in the way it worked (besides new visuals). Those I believe the visuals needs to do a better job of showing that it has a "set-up time".
|
I still believe immos are too weak.
I tested these two scenario in a completely open field;
Test 1: 6 immortals (900/450) with range vs 5 tanks (750/500) --> Result: 1 tank died, 4 tanks survived!
Test 2: 4 immortals + 3 zealots (900/300 with range vs 5 tanks (750/500) --> Results. Tanks can kill immortals, then unsiege and finish off the zealots with two tanks surviving!
This is clearly not balanced in my opinion and stuff like this is what I see as a result of the snowball economy; Mech needs to be really really cost effective because the Sbow econ hurts it so badly. But if they manage to secure bases, then they can obtain an insanely cost effective 200/200 army that protoss can never ever touch (as long as you have decent EMP micro).
But in games where the terran player makes a small mistakes in the early game and doesn't secure a fast enough 3rd or 4th, he is likely to get behind very quickly and it just snowballs from there on in favor of protoss.
Thus, I believe that we should experiment with easier to take bases with lower mineral pathes at the expense of immortals being better vs tanks.
|
Its way to easy to say if tvp is favored lategame for terran
1) sv vs arbiter, a very important battle. You say with decent emp micro. How u know this now? What if the protoss use decent arbiter micro?
2) The sentinel with safeguard, not tested alot imo. I believe it can be really good if used correct
3) better archon
Its not as easy as u think it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
