EPT[A] Starbow - Page 368
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
On August 25 2013 20:57 Xiphias wrote: Dec is working on a behavior which will make zealot vs hydra much more fair and more fun to micro. He showed me and it should solve the issue. Even make gameplay a lot better Yes played with it and chatted with Dec for 2 hours, and I finally understood why this "stop thing" is much better for micro. When units stop before they shoot, the "micro trick" of grouping all your units and kiting them back becomes less efficient. Instead, these ranged units gets compensated with a movement/accelration buff. This makes it possible to micro individual injured units back. So this type of kiting actually becomes much more similar to blink micro or splitting marines vs banelings, and it is a lot more fun than when you use take all of your units and kite them. I think we should implement this for the Hydra and Immortal, since these units at the moment are already poorly balanced (so there is nothing to lose there). I also believe that zealot activateble charge thing should be removed in favor of just BW'ish-leglots (faster overall). The advantage here is that faster zealots makes it possible to retarget a standing still hydra. When zealots have the activable thing (which they will use right before battle), then they have to be a bit slower in normal mode, which makes retagetting micro less rewarded. Regarding reworking maps or adding 3rd worker income I still believe the idea of reworking maps have more potential overall, however by adding 3rd worker income it will make future map design a lot easier as we almost can just copy BW'maps. Also it is important to note that we have stronger dropships and stronger warp prism (even if it gets nerfed it will still be better than shuttle) so I think there is a potential for a bit more stuff going on in TvP mech in BW for the first 20 minutes. If noone is interested in experimenting with the "half-base 4th" idea, I think we should just adopt the 3rd-worker econ approach ASAP. | ||
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Denmark697 Posts
It is however going to be a big model, so I'm splitting it into two parts: First part will adress what classifications there are to unit stats and attributes. The second part will analyze how these classifications and be a reference for discussion on what stats does what for a unit in terms of how usefull, balanced or fun it is. Remember that this is just a theory based on my observations and analysis. I will be more than happy to adjust my model if someone finds flaws or corrections to be made. Part one: Attribute groups and classification First we have to define what a unit attribute is. In my model it is any stat or ability that deviates from the baseline unit. That is the unit that is the absolute average for all races in the game. It has average attacks, health speed ect. and no defining features. Once we have this unit defined we can start to classify how these deviations work on the unit. The main classifications are: Balance effect. + Show Spoiler + This classification is defining if the attribute is making the unit weaker or stronger than the baseline. For the sake of clarity it gets the classification naming of positive/negative. Balance effect is easy to understand, and not much more is needed to be said. Any stat lower than the baseline is a negative attribute. Any ability that hurts the enemies is a positive attribute. All attributes are either positive or negative - if an attribute can be seen as neutral it can most likely be split into two composit attributes. Strength + Show Spoiler + Strength determines how big an effect any small change in this attribute has on the overall unit. Borrowing from the original post I will call this Primary/Secondary. Primary attributes have a big effect on how the unit is used, have wide balance impact and are generally more interesting to balance by. Secondary attributes have less overall impact, but can still have an important effect on balance. Generally speaking primary attributes are all the things that make units die faster. Low health, fast attacks, movement and range effects all fall under the primary category. Secondary attributes are usually things that slow down battles by making units die slower. High HP, low damage and pacifying effects are all in this category. While part 2 will deal with the complex effect this category has on overall usefullnes of units, it must be said that this is the most vital classification. It shows directly what kind of changes to a unit will have big implications, while other changes might be more gentle to overall balance. Volume + Show Spoiler + This one is more simple. How much of this attribute does the unit have? Is it a big or a small movement advantage, a slight or great HP deficit, an above average or strong attack. It simply describes the quantity of the attribute the unit deviates from the baseline. Total attribute strength is the general strength times its volume. Attribute group + Show Spoiler + This classification is more complicated, and is bound to have sub-classifications. There are diffent ways to give a unit attributes. You could change its stats, give it abilities, toy with the movement triggers, change armor group and damage type or even just change its cost and supply. All of these ways to balance a unit can fit into their own group. I have however identified 3 main groups: Basic. Advanced. Special/Strategic. The basic group is the simplest to describe and understand. It is any attribute tied to base stats only. This means that stim will not be considered in this group, since it does not affect the base stats permanently. Things like hardened shields, damage types or splash damage effects are not in this group either. It is limited to movespeed, attack speed, attack damage, range, health (shields included) and armor. The advanced group is more complex. This is basically all the things that did not fit in the basic group but still has a general effect on how the unit interacts with its surroundings. It can be split up into two primary groups: Altering attributes are generally buffs or debuffs to units. These attributes temporarely changes the base stats of units (friend or foe). They are simple to understand and use, but can hold some interesting strategic decisions due to being temporary. Mimicking attributes is the most interesting group of them all. These attributes are not directly affecting the normal stats of a unit in any way, but rather achieve the same effect as a base stat. This group includes: Splash damage, movement abilities, acceleration/deceleration stats, damage spells and stealth. These attributes add a lot of complexity, so they are generally good for making unit more interesting, but bad if a unit is already hard to use. The special group is for strategic attributes. These attributes are generally really bad for the unit, but good for the game. This classification is for attributes that are tailored for interactions with specific units or unit groups. There are two sub categories to this group. First one is the metastats. This is things such as build time, tech tree, upgrade costs, unit cost and supply cost. This group is basically anything that does not affect the unit itself, but rather how easy it is to get on the board. Second one is the strategic stats. These attributes include the special interactions that make unit worse or better against specific units or unit types. Damage modifiers, special damage resistance (absorb), air/ground split and many more "tricks" fall into this category. Basically these classifications can be summerized into this: Basic group contains all deviations the unit has from the baseline primary stats. Advanced group contains the attributes that either mimic or buff/debuff primary stats. Special group contains the metastats and the specialized modifiers. All attributes can also be labelled as positive/negative depending on what balance effects it has, primary/secondary depending on if it slows down or speeds up battles and "Volume" describing just how much of this attribute there is. I know kabel has been using the earlier model to try and balance a few things, so I hope this will make it more transperent where and how to balance problematic units. Part 2 will be coming later down the line. Feel free to discuss and come with suggestions. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Tanks are better, zerg also have lurkers. A slight redesign to it could work to, lets say blinding cloud reduces range by 50%. This was suggested in another thread to makeimmobile units more viable and blinding cloud better against mobile units in sc2. Instead of having it in an area it could be on some units. I prefer in an area though. There are ways to look at it I agree now, that zerg has no other choice than darkswarm vs mech. Though, on bigger maps flanking could be a huge option (and more fun). In bw, zerg against mech actually flanked when the map was open for it with mass hydras. Right now with darkswarm, its not especially fun. Terran needs sciencevessels or he is doomed. So two huge spellcasters, i have not problem with it perse but them become very dominant in the matchup Although, darkswarm is more fun against bio cuz it becomes more tactical. Its not only standing still at one place cuz terran can do some huge moves there also. #zealot vs hydra Its actually a boring fight atm, but attacksystem is beeing worked on? Iam so happy hider actually likes that attacksystem now, also the attacksystem should be on everyunit(?) Makes every battle more tactical, period. It really do! I feel the movement speed is rather low on both. In bw zealot moved at 3.4 (close) and no ability and hydra at 3.17(close). I played sc2bw, the game is also faster but it felt alot more fun just moving around  Infact, i have talked about all of these things before. Even the creep thing, hider says when zerg have creeps connected to his third with hydras, there is no way for protoss to engage cost ineffecienctly (makes the gameplay suffer huge imo). So protoss backs off at all cost, and do something else. At the sametime zerg have a hard time attacking protoss cuz he needs the creepmovementspeed or he is costineffecient. I have said it before and i say it again, creep removes gameplay more than you think #zealot vs zergling I actually believe the zerglings wins here cost effeciently. Zealot has 10more shield(buff) ZErglings has more attackspeed(buff) like 0.7 more, so zergling should win? Although, with micro and new attacksystem this could actually also be more interesting #hiders map idea I would atleast wanna try it on one map when the new economy kicks in, if it turns out good, variation like this cant be bad(?) #with the new attacksystem and new economy I feel we need to adjust the relationship more than just these units. The battles should feel epic, and not cat or mouse all the time | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
Though, on bigger maps flanking could be a huge option (and more fun). I tested this with Danko in a completley open field. It was like 26 tanks vs like 150 hydras (something insane like that. Cost of hydra's was roughly double of the tank cost). Tanks won with maybe life 10 left or so with no dark swarm (so flanking isn't that rewarded). With just 3 defilers and IMO mediocore usage of dark swarm (it wasn't casted very well), hydra's won with 50 left or something. So the difference is absoltuely gigantic. I think the binding cloud suggestion with less range would be fine as well. Again, if the cost effieicny discrepencay becomes too problematic and overlord drop play is weak late game, then we could consider buffing overlord drops with a T3 upgrade. I actually believe the zerglings wins here cost effeciently. Zealot has 10more shield(buff) ZErglings has more attackspeed(buff) like 0.7 more, so zergling should win? Although, with micro and new attacksystem this could actually also be more interesting We also tested this. With decent scale and even with speedlings being "bugged" as it has the same attack speed as it always had (while all other units have had their attack speed reduced), zealots comes out quite ahead in terms of cost efficicency (like 15 zealots vs 60 lings). I would atleast wanna try it on one map when the new economy kicks in, if it turns out good, variation like this cant be bad(?) This type of map isn't neccesary with new econ. Instead it is a way that players can increase their income without taking extremely risky bases. With this map, the new econ becomes oboselete as you don't want to use the 3rd worker to mine then (you rather take it at the easy 4th). | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
#dark swarm in bw It didnt reduce splash at all I dont know how to make it "fun" as zerg to play against mech, blinding cloud replacing and a buff to hydra could probably add something. Although, flanking should add some fun to the matchup atleast The problem is, if the defiler gets this, he is so immobile can he ever land a spell? Any other ideas to make mech vs zerg more fun mu? Also, in bw it was quite normal to go siegetanks+many goliaths So overlord drop, i dont think it can work in the long run EDIT: the thing is darkswarm doesnt do much in zvp cuz of zealots, archons, reavers and storm. archons still do their splash. Though you think it reduces the aoe attacks? ohh, i actually think it do so it do things there to, hmm. Well i dislike darkswarm. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
On August 25 2013 23:30 Foxxan wrote: so the zerglings attackspeed is only bugged, not actually a buff? #dark swarm in bw It didnt reduce splash at all I dont know how to make it "fun" as zerg to play against mech, blinding cloud replacing and a buff to hydra could probably add something. Although, flanking should add some fun to the matchup atleast The problem is, if the defiler gets this, he is so immobile can he ever land a spell? Any other ideas to make mech vs zerg more fun mu? Also, in bw it was quite normal to go siegetanks+many goliaths So overlord drop, i dont think it can work in the long run EDIT: the thing is darkswarm doesnt do much in zvp cuz of zealots, archons, reavers and storm. archons still do their splash. Though you think it reduces the aoe attacks? ohh, i actually think it do so it do things there to, hmm. Well i dislike darkswarm. could be a buff, but I just think Kabel forgot to change i though (since all other units have been changed). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
On August 25 2013 23:30 Foxxan wrote: so the zerglings attackspeed is only bugged, not actually a buff? #dark swarm in bw It didnt reduce splash at all I dont know how to make it "fun" as zerg to play against mech, blinding cloud replacing and a buff to hydra could probably add something. Although, flanking should add some fun to the matchup atleast The problem is, if the defiler gets this, he is so immobile can he ever land a spell? Any other ideas to make mech vs zerg more fun mu? Also, in bw it was quite normal to go siegetanks+many goliaths So overlord drop, i dont think it can work in the long run EDIT: the thing is darkswarm doesnt do much in zvp cuz of zealots, archons, reavers and storm. archons still do their splash. Though you think it reduces the aoe attacks? ohh, i actually think it do so it do things there to, hmm. Well i dislike darkswarm. Depends on how well the terran is splitted. If he has his units all out over the map, then he can't protect all tanks with goliaths. From what I watched in BW, overlord drops seemed to be how you beat mech late game as zerg. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
| ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
"Instead, these ranged units gets compensated with a movement/acceleration buff." Actually it is because melee units stand in place to attack, but miss if the target moves away while trying to attack. This lets you dodge melee attacks and also lets you have melee units that are faster than ranged units and not just win for free. Everything else was right though. Ahahaha now I don't have anything to post about ^^. @ZvTanks Hopefully with the new pathing I plan to see in action this will be less punishing. In small numbers of tanks, hydra play counters mech. In huge numbers of tanks, hydras start to get crushed. This either opens up tech switches for Z, or you could hit all of his exposed positions. Just as well, you get dark swarm tech hopefully by this time which lets you actually fight vs mech (not as good compared to vs bio though). I think the best advantage you have is that you are able to eco extremely hard compared to a vulture into bio push player. Much like all aoe, hopefully the new pathing will have units spread out by default enough to make siege tank fire, mines, reavers, and even dark swarm less punishing. Just gotta work out the kinks. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Based on many of your PMs, your chatting with me ingame, and posts made in this thread, here is a summary of the gameplay problems reported in the last 1-2 weeks (or even longer?), mainly by the active players: The problems: >>>+ Show Spoiler + - The economy is bad/broken/boring/needs improvements - Every pathing system sucks - There is no, or too little, micro in the game - The gamespeed is bad - The maps are bad - Many of the basic unit relationships are broken/just boring - Blink will always be broken and lead to lame game play - Stalker feels worthless and has no role - Immortal is boring/useless/too hard to macro since it is on the Robo facility. - Marauder switch weapon is shit - Reaver is broken - Protoss is just boring and uninteresting - TvP is boring, broken and bad - ZvT mech is lame - Spellcasters dominate the combats too much - Dark swarm is flawed and does not fit with the SC2 enginge - Creep spread destroys the gameplay - Warp gate is too nerfed and boring - and a huge load of minor, more specific, things I have in my notes. And I get new reports almost daily. Ok. >>>+ Show Spoiler + Quite a lot of stuff to deal with. - Of course all of you do not say the exact same things. - Of course each problem is far more complex than how I worded it above. - Of course stuff like "bad, lame or boring" are subjective and individual. But I still consider it problems, mainly because I share some of the feelings. If it ain´t exciting, it ain´t exciting. Paint that dries on the wall is not exciting for anyone. It does feel quite overwhelming, to be honest. It is ofc important that you all report a lot of stuff about the gameplay, especially if it is problems/flaws/bugs etc. Its up to me to evaluate it and determine if it makes any sense. And if its true, I need to adapt to that, and use as good solutions as possible to improve the game. (And that is why we discuss, since I do not claim to know everything.) But I understand that most of you think there are some good stuff in this MOD too, otherwise you would not care to play it at all. And there is no real point to just report/talk about what is good in a development process. And yes, I agree with many of the larger match-up flaws/problems. (Not all though.) And that kinda makes me a bit blue, since I feel I never get anywhere. I aimed to "complete" this before August was over. It is not realistic. It is never realistic. I am also back at my two jobs now. In case anyone is curious what I do: Bartender/waiter at a restaurant & guide at a museum. Full time studies at university. I get less and less time to devote to this. And yet there are still a lot of balance work to do. "The master plan" : >>>+ Show Spoiler + I will release one big patch next week. Most likely will I get it up before Friday. (I am busy with work for some evenings in a row now.) Luckily for me, XiA will help me fix the remaining known bugs/issues. And December does an amazing job inventing new gameplay improvements for micro etc. I will use his new micro attack system, his new micro pathing he works on, and I will keep the game speed slowed down with a proper method. I will also implement a new economy that is closer to BW. (Xiphias sent me some numbers I will try.) Apart from that, I will go through all relationships in BW and try to use that as a reference for Starbow. I will for example look at speed and damage relationships between Shuttle - Scourge - Mutalisk - Zealot - Hydralisk etc, and balance Starbow closer to that. I will make adjustements to make sure the new factors of Starbow fit in, like macro mechanics, certain spells, units, splash area and so on. And yes, I honestly consider to replace the Stalker/Immortal with the Dragoon. I do think the Stalker/Immortal will be better for the game in the longer run, but I do not have time to mess around more with that. There are already complete relationships in BW I can just recreate in Starbow. December has made a micro solution for the Immortal though. (I think he will upload a video or a test map with it, so you all can see or try it.) But I still fear there will always be balance and role problems for the Stalker & Immortal anyway. Hmm. After all, the original intent of this project was to build a decent "follow up" to BW, since that and TFT are the only games I´ve ever enjoyed. And SC2 made me disapointed. Make a SC2 I enjoy to play at least ^^ So I will dive down into the roots of BW, and use that as the concrete for Starbow. Much easier than to tweak values left and right forever. Especially since time is a limited resource. Hopefully will this create a better and more familiar foundation for the game. The future? >>>+ Show Spoiler + Well, then there is not much more I can do. I will see if this next patch can help with the fundamentals: (Micro system, economy, potential Dragoon, more BW values we know works for the basic unit relationships.) Maybe do more tweak with some additional smaller patches. If I feel it is good enough, I will "advertise." If I never reach that state, well.. then maybe someone else must take over. I don´t know. I will ofc not be gone just because I am busy with work + school, like most people are. I generally think it is quite fun to work on this. But it is not realistic nor healthy to keep spending countless hours working on something that never gets completed. Obviously I am doing something very wrong. I often hear that I listen too much to other players. But I kinda feel that is important. I can ofc not make everyone like everything. That is not my intention. But if several of the active master players agrees that certain things in the game must be improved/adjusted because of design flaws or balance problems, then I think its important to examine, discuss and consider it. Try to understand if it is a problem that needs to be fixed by me, or if it can be fixed by the players strategies/build orders. Oh well, I will let the game be uploaded but I will most likely not do any small patches now. Instead I aim to do a larger and more complete one in maybe 4-5 days. (But if December sends me something he has created, that needs to be tried in a real Starbow game, then I will try to upload it.) So please continue to discuss the game. Playtest more if you still find it funny, despite the known problems. Thank you for your support. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
I forgot to upload this picture two days ago. >>>+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5DzU3Xp.jpg) Here is an ingame photo of a huge Hydra army + Defilers. 2-3 Swarms cover the entire army. The Defilers are always super protected since units clump so well. Hard to catch a lonely Defiler on the open field... Even hard to get close to Irradiate. Dark Swarm was a great spell in BW - it was hard to execute for the Zerg player, it was possible for the enemy to snipe the Defilers moving across the maps, since armies were so spread out. But if Z was really good, he got great benefit from the spell. And it was often exciting too. Here we move everything in a ball. As soon as combat happens - Bam bam bam swarm swarm swarm super protection. It is boring to play with, its boring to play against and it is boring to watch, since it is always a perfect result that can be executed very easily. So either must the spell be redesigned to fit into the SC2 enginge, and do something different. Or the area of effect must be severely smaller. (But still a lot of Defilers can accomplish the same thing) Or the move speed of Defilers very slow. Or something else. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
Actually it is because melee units stand in place to attack, but miss if the target moves away while trying to attack. This lets you dodge melee attacks and also lets you have melee units that are faster than ranged units and not just win for free. Everything else was right though. Ahahaha now I don't have anything to post about ^^. Yeh I realized that shortly after I wrote. Forgot to edit, but isn't the effect the same or just very similar? | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
On August 26 2013 04:38 Kabel wrote: The current state of Starbow Based on many of your PMs, your chatting with me ingame, and posts made in this thread, here is a summary of the gameplay problems reported in the last 1-2 weeks (or even longer?), mainly by the active players: The problems: >>>+ Show Spoiler + - The economy is bad/broken/boring/needs improvements - Every pathing system sucks - There is no, or too little, micro in the game - The gamespeed is bad - The maps are bad - Many of the basic unit relationships are broken/just boring - Blink will always be broken and lead to lame game play - Stalker feels worthless and has no role - Immortal is boring/useless/too hard to macro since it is on the Robo facility. - Marauder switch weapon is shit - Reaver is broken - Protoss is just boring and uninteresting - TvP is boring, broken and bad - ZvT mech is lame - Spellcasters dominate the combats too much - Dark swarm is flawed and does not fit with the SC2 enginge - Creep spread destroys the gameplay - Warp gate is too nerfed and boring - and a huge load of minor, more specific, things I have in my notes. And I get new reports almost daily. Ok. >>>+ Show Spoiler + Quite a lot of stuff to deal with. - Of course all of you do not say the exact same things. - Of course each problem is far more complex than how I worded it above. - Of course stuff like "bad, lame or boring" are subjective and individual. But I still consider it problems, mainly because I share some of the feelings. If it ain´t exciting, it ain´t exciting. Paint that dries on the wall is not exciting for anyone. It does feel quite overwhelming, to be honest. It is ofc important that you all report a lot of stuff about the gameplay, especially if it is problems/flaws/bugs etc. Its up to me to evaluate it and determine if it makes any sense. And if its true, I need to adapt to that, and use as good solutions as possible to improve the game. (And that is why we discuss, since I do not claim to know everything.) But I understand that most of you think there are some good stuff in this MOD too, otherwise you would not care to play it at all. And there is no real point to just report/talk about what is good in a development process. And yes, I agree with many of the larger match-up flaws/problems. (Not all though.) And that kinda makes me a bit blue, since I feel I never get anywhere. I aimed to "complete" this before August was over. It is not realistic. It is never realistic. I am also back at my two jobs now. In case anyone is curious what I do: Bartender/waiter at a restaurant & guide at a museum. Full time studies at university. I get less and less time to devote to this. And yet there are still a lot of balance work to do. "The master plan" : >>>+ Show Spoiler + I will release one big patch next week. Most likely will I get it up before Friday. (I am busy with work for some evenings in a row now.) Luckily for me, XiA will help me fix the remaining known bugs/issues. And December does an amazing job inventing new gameplay improvements for micro etc. I will use his new micro attack system, his new micro pathing he works on, and I will keep the game speed slowed down with a proper method. I will also implement a new economy that is closer to BW. (Xiphias sent me some numbers I will try.) Apart from that, I will go through all relationships in BW and try to use that as a reference for Starbow. I will for example look at speed and damage relationships between Shuttle - Scourge - Mutalisk - Zealot - Hydralisk etc, and balance Starbow closer to that. I will make adjustements to make sure the new factors of Starbow fit in, like macro mechanics, certain spells, units, splash area and so on. And yes, I honestly consider to replace the Stalker/Immortal with the Dragoon. I do think the Stalker/Immortal will be better for the game in the longer run, but I do not have time to mess around more with that. There are already complete relationships in BW I can just recreate in Starbow. December has made a micro solution for the Immortal though. (I think he will upload a video or a test map with it, so you all can see or try it.) But I still fear there will always be balance and role problems for the Stalker & Immortal anyway. Hmm. After all, the original intent of this project was to build a decent "follow up" to BW, since that and TFT are the only games I´ve ever enjoyed. And SC2 made me disapointed. Make a SC2 I enjoy to play at least ^^ So I will dive down into the roots of BW, and use that as the concrete for Starbow. Much easier than to tweak values left and right forever. Especially since time is a limited resource. Hopefully will this create a better and more familiar foundation for the game. The future? >>>+ Show Spoiler + Well, then there is not much more I can do. I will see if this next patch can help with the fundamentals: (Micro system, economy, potential Dragoon, more BW values we know works for the basic unit relationships.) Maybe do more tweak with some additional smaller patches. If I feel it is good enough, I will "advertise." If I never reach that state, well.. then maybe someone else must take over. I don´t know. I will ofc not be gone just because I am busy with work + school, like most people are. I generally think it is quite fun to work on this. But it is not realistic nor healthy to keep spending countless hours working on something that never gets completed. Obviously I am doing something very wrong. I often hear that I listen too much to other players. But I kinda feel that is important. I can ofc not make everyone like everything. That is not my intention. But if several of the active master players agrees that certain things in the game must be improved/adjusted because of design flaws or balance problems, then I think its important to examine, discuss and consider it. Try to understand if it is a problem that needs to be fixed by me, or if it can be fixed by the players strategies/build orders. Oh well, I will let the game be uploaded but I will most likely not do any small patches now. Instead I aim to do a larger and more complete one in maybe 4-5 days. (But if December sends me something he has created, that needs to be tried in a real Starbow game, then I will try to upload it.) So please continue to discuss the game. Playtest more if you still find it funny, despite the known problems. Thank you for your support. Yeh I agree with all here. Sbow econ and stalker + immo relationships feels like it has more potential, however they are pretty hard to get absolutely right. I think BW'ish econ is the right decision in terms of easiness of management, and I think of all the fun stuff I can do with terran now if i can somewhat longer on 2/3 bases, so I support that. Regarding Dragoon, I think we should just "consider" that at the moment. With new Immortal (designed by Dec), the overall feeling will probably be a lot better. Further, there is one big advantage to the blink stalker as it allows protoss to "survive" on blink stalker tech vs mutalisks. I fear that protoss play will be more limited without that option. Stalker also do have a role (in theory) vs bio and zerg, however versus the latter I think there may be slight balance issue atm (they are too weak). An attack speed buff thus might be needed here. Versus mech is the real problem (I think in any other situations we can fix potential issues via balance tweaks). I do think they have a role, but it's not particularly fun to build a unit you can't use offensively. Personally I would love to see if we could find some creative way to make 8-12 stalkers usefull in the mid/late game as a harassing squad. At the moment though they just get too easily killed by a planetary + a couple of tank combo that any decent mech player always will ahve at his expos. But if it could perhaps blink on top of of the defensive tanks, take out two of them, force planetary mode and then retreat, I belive the game could be much more awesome. Besides giving it a new role it will also open up the game even more drastically as protoss has no other units that can actually force planetary mode without commiting significantly to it. So how could we make the stalker a "planetary + very few tank" killer"? Could a blink buff accomplish that? 8 second cooldown, longer blinking range? Another unrelated thing; I belive scouts movement speed upgrade should be removed. It simply prevents banshee's and dropships late game way too efficiently. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
i got a bit shocked when i read your post kabel, i am not entirely sure why You struggled with immortal for so long and now puff, its out of the game and in comes a new comrade. The dragoon. And all of a sudden u wanna have the bw attacksystem, new economy. Iam all positive about it ofcourse. It it was I who made the decision i would just either remove or nerf to hell with stuff that were broken or boring. Its hard ofcourse if u dont see it with clear eyes. Harder to do than say to But using the bw relationships can help alot with balance and op or not For example the ghost, 25energy - lockdown any tunit BW ghost - 100energy, only mechanical units RIght there it says imbalanced to me, and "funwise", it can actually counter both reaver and hightemplar, both the aoe from protoss if u go bio as terran. Anyway, ofcourse i will try to help you with the gameplay. edit: SO with tweaks to aoe, maybe protoss and hydra can get buffed further So protoss doesnt have to relie on aoe versus zerg or bio terran as much | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
1. Dec's movement and pathing will be awesome if he can perfect it and would instantly solve dragoon/immortal problem. 2. Eco. It's not that bad. I've shared some findings with you, I think it can easily be improved. We can try it at least, but it is ok as it is. Not perferct, but ok. 3. The rest is quite trivial. | ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
 .- Many of the basic unit relationships are broken/just boring - Blink will always be broken and lead to lame game play - Stalker feels worthless and has no role - Immortal is boring/useless/too hard to macro since it is on the Robo facility. - Protoss is just boring and uninteresting - TvP is boring, broken and bad - Warp gate is too nerfed and boring I feel these are all connected to the stalker/immortal dynamic. unit relationships are very hard to balance with these 2, blink is obvious, immortal can't be on warpgate, protoss is uninteresting atm to me purely due to an unnatural basic unit mix, it's hard to have a 'core' army to start from because of the weird unit relations so you just end up abusing high tier units to make up for it. TvP mech is also a stalker/immortal problem and warp gate was nerfed mainly because of blink-timings. This is just one huge problem that indeed has a relatively easy fix, with the dragoon protoss will feel whole again, an all around unit that is fun to micro and isn't broken. This means we will see a better balance between gateway units / tech units in numbers which leads to more units control and less ability spam. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Imagine being able to warp in dragoons to your enemies base. Vultures can at least get to zealot warp ins pretty quickly, but if they have to fight against dragoons being warped in???? edit: BTW is anyone able to get on right now? It would help making a vod to show off micro if I had someone to kite against me. | ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
On August 26 2013 06:04 decemberscalm wrote: With warp gate, I'm worried it will be an earlier recall utilizing just a warp prism into your opponents base. Imagine being able to warp in dragoons to your enemies base. Vultures can at least get to zealot warp ins pretty quickly, but if they have to fight against dragoons being warped in???? edit: BTW is anyone able to get on right now? It would help making a vod to show off micro if I had someone to kite against me. yeh i agre here. I really like new warp tech. Relative to the Sc2 one, it is mainly weaker in two ways; 1) The whole "build half of an army inside your main"-approach which I do not think is good for gameplay. 2) Defensive warp ins to prevent harass, which I also do not think is good for gameplay. In terms of late game harass potential, it is still very strong I believe. With warp in time being long enough (like at least 7 seconds) then an active terran could just lay some mines next to the dragoons while they're being warped in and they'd get oneshotted, means you can actually defend it quite easily without much invest if you're on top of your game. yet vulture harass mid/late game isn't particuarly strong at the moment anyway. In BW it was also doable to deal with superfast vultures without it. Also you can easily warp in units behind cannons, so cannons can kill mines. | ||
| ||
