|
Marauder = stronger versus aoe than marine, stronger early presence against mechanical units
But it also takes more damage from dragoon shots than marines (I think 20 vs 10).. Not convinced that it is noticeable better than marines vs dragoons (in terms of cost efficiency). Currently it works cus you can transform it instantly so you can own probe pulling. However, if that part gets removed I think it will be kinda close to effficiency of marines vs protoss early on. At least the difference will be not be huge enough to justifiy having it in the game.
@Abduct
I think there is a bit of an issue here. Vs marine/tank zerg can basically pulll tanks/Sv's away every single time due to the huge range advantage of Vipers. Rnage of Irradiate/EMP is too low too efficiently counter it, and SV's are also more expensive.
I guess in Sc2 the Viper is kinda useless vs MMMM, and vs protoss HT's (with fast reactions) can counter it. In Sbow there isn't really anything efficient for terran, and I believe one of two adjustments must be made;
Solution 1: A range reduction (to 6-7 maybe).
Solution 2: A redesign that makes it possible to kill the "pull" thing if you manually target it quickly. When killed the Viper will drop the unit on the ground. This suggestion also implies that the "pull-proces" is slower.
|
Some comments from me:
I am busy nowadays, but I try to watch re-streams, replays, follow this thread and read PMs, to keep up with whats going on. The game does indeed feel/look a lot more like BW now. Especially TvP. But that is good. We have the basics. This means that we can from here try to diversify the game. Make room for other types of playstyles, other units, other game dynamic and balance.
As I talked about here, I intend to upload a test map where we can try alternative stuff: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=408#8145
Details for the test map:
>>>+ Show Spoiler +Concerns I try to adress in this test map: - Reapers too strong early vs Z - Vikings too dominant vs Mutalisks. - Marauder + SCV pushes/all in too strong/boring. - Encourage more dropplay/harassment Hider has sent me some values for Immortal/Stalker, that fits with the BW damage system, and should in mathematical terms correspond to the Dragoon balance. I am curious to try them. Detailed changes:>>> + Show Spoiler +
- Reaper build time increased from 38 to 45 seconds.
- SCV life 45
- Warp prism starting speed 2.95 (instead of BW 2.5)
- Stalker & Immortal have new stats and are both built at the Cybernetics core, instead of the Dragoon. Both units can shoot air.
- Vikings deal 50% splash dmg vs air units instead of 100%. (So 2x8 dmg vs the main target, 50% vs nearby air units)
- Vikings can upgrade a speed upg that gives them the same speed as Mutalisks. (Instead of range upgrade)
- Marauder has to research a 50/50 upgrade with build time 140 seconds to unlock the "flame-attack."
(Yes, it deals splash dmg to units under Dark Swarm. I do not know how to add a delay time between switching weapons so it looks and feels good.)
I know some of you want to try other stuff as well, like different stats for Hydras, reworked spells, new spells etc.
But this is the start.
<<<
I would also need help in the editor. The bug list is getting larger and I can not keep up.
Known important bugs:
+ Show Spoiler + - Hallucinations takes no damage from Stalker, Immortal, Dragoon, Hydralisk, Siege Tank, Vulture,
- If many Null Wards are close to each other and attack an enemy unit, the enemy unit takes only damage from 1.(On the other hand, this forces players to spread out their Null wards and not clump them together)
- Spider mines sometimes attack workers. (!!)
- Spider mines do not always deal damage to enemy units?
- Corsair, Marauder Flame attack, Baneling deals NOT full damage vs shields.
- Dragoons do not always deal damage?
- Corsair AOE bugged vs Mutalisks?
|
when is testmap coming up?
Also i hoped you look at my bugdetection page before. Very importat one, the dragoon bug
|
Testmap just got uploaded. (Had some trouble with B.net)
Yeah I re-read your bug post now and add it to my list.
Edit;
We now have Fighting Spirit as a playable version of the Test map.
There is also a Unit Tester Test map, in case anyone wanna try Vikings vs Mutalisks, compare Stalker/Immortal/Dragoon and so on.
|
The unit tester dont work.
I got into the game but cant do anything
The immortal have double attack value in FS test map
|
Immortal range upgrade should probably just be 100/100. Kinda overpriced that you have to pay 100/100 for stalker range and 150/150 for immortal range.
The immortal have double attack value in FS test map
It does deal the correct damage. Just the info bar that is a bit confusing.
@ Immortal
This Immortal seems to have a back now, so it isn't as microable as it was preivously I think.
|
The unit tester dont work.
I got into the game but cant do anything
I will look into it now.
This Immortal seems to have a back now, so it isn't as microable as it was preivously I think.
I have not changed anything about it, except the damage values for the testmap.
|
On September 19 2013 01:36 Kabel wrote:I will look into it now. Show nested quote +This Immortal seems to have a back now, so it isn't as microable as it was preivously I think. I have not changed anything about it, except the damage values for the testmap.
Am I wrong or wasn't there a period where the Immortal would look "back" when it was retreating so it didn't have to turn around to make kite micro?
|
The "tower" stays on target as long as it is in range, even if the unit is walking back. It's been doing that in the recent patches. You might have misunderstood though.
|
|
|
Corsair AOE is currently almost non-existant. While the players I saw using them were not exactly using correctly (picking engagements, bad target fire) they WERE however flat out broken against mutalisks.
This is due to how damage vs types and aoe works.
The same issue happened with siege tanks and hydralisks not getting splashed any damage.
Map editor speak, INTO THE SPOILER WE GO!
+ Show Spoiler +
So here is how damage vs different sizes used to be set up for things like the siege tank.
Combat attritbute factor vs medium units is .75, and vs light .5.
So your 70 damage will get halved to .5 against light. 35 damage.
But lets bring aoe into the scenario. It is set up in the damage damage effect. AOE means you do a fraction of damage at a different radius.
So, lets say .5 damage at 1 radius.
What happens when the damage effect occurs? It reduces by both the attribute factor AND the aoe fraction at the same time. The fractions actually get added up instead of multiplied for some weird blizzard reason.
It should be 70*.5 (for vs light)=35*.5 (radius)=whatever number.
Instead blizz does .5(vs light)+.5(radius)=0.
ZERO damage.
So we must avoid fractions for attribute factor all together.
Siege tank and spider mine aoe is a set of three different damage effects each with the same aoe radius.
Siege tank vs armored is 70
Siege tank vs medium is whatever 70* .75 is
Siege tank vs light is 35.
So then we get the proper 35*.5=damage
As for corsairs, we could easily just multiply 5*.5 and make that the combat amount vs light, but you still need to tweak things like combat armor and shield factor (full damage to shield).
Armor again becomes extremely important.
With armor calculated first using armor reduction .5 for vs light. 5-1(muta armor +1)=4/2=2 damage
Default sc2 armor system, bonus first 2.5 damage -1 armor=1.5 damage
Craaaaazzzzy huge difference no?
|
Please fix fast dec. Nice find! Also, immortals (confirmed) and dragoons (?) (and maybe other units?) deals absolutely no dmg to high ground whatsoever.
|
On September 19 2013 14:01 Xiphias wrote:
Please fix fast dec. Nice find! Also, immortals (confirmed) and dragoons (?) (and maybe other units?) deals absolutely no dmg to high ground whatsoever.
I need replays and times. Has anyone tried replicating this and making absolute sure it is the case?
|
So its fixable right? Bit confusing for me.
Overall all aoe attacks did less? Or?
Any singletarget that did some weird things also?
|
On September 19 2013 14:01 Xiphias wrote:
Please fix fast dec. Nice find! Also, immortals (confirmed) and dragoons (?) (and maybe other units?) deals absolutely no dmg to high ground whatsoever.
So is this the same logic when they are on the highground and shoots down, they deal no damage either?
This has happened a few times for me atleast
|
I think I discovered why Immortals did a bit better vs mech than expected. There are 3 reasons;
1) Increased supply efficiency. Immortals are only 2 supply but assuming they are 30% better than Dragoons, you effectively save 7.5 minerals per Immortal you get due to investing less in pylons. Not a huge deal in it self though - but it adds up.
2) Vultures need to stop before they can shoot. This makes them a bit less effective in some situations vs Imortals.
3) The main reason is that Immortals with 16 damage vs medium (ignoring upgrades) exactly 5-shots vultures. Dragoons 6-shotted vultures, so while Immortals in terms of pure DPS only is 6.7% higher than Dragoon, in terms of shot-efficiency vs vultures it is 20% better. Thus, Immortals deal absolutely fine vs Vultures + tanks without any Stalker support.
Now there are two types of solutions
Solution 1: Increase Vultures HP from 80 to 85. This will make Immortals worse vs Vultures while still keeping Immortal strenght vs Hydra + Lurker. This will also slightly buff vultures vs zerg. This solution should be prefered if ZvP midgame cost efficiency = balanced and if it wouldn't hurt if Vultures were sightly better vs zerg.
Solution 2: Reduce Immortal damage vs medium from 16 to 14. This will make Immortals worse vs Vultures + banshee's + Hydras. This option should be prefered if protoss midgame is a bit too strong vs zerg. However, unlike vs Vultures, Immortals doesn't fiveshot Hydralisks as they regenerate HP.
Not entirely sure what solution is prefered. Would probably require a bit of unit testing. In one way solution 1 is the most clean solution as it creates more assymmetry between the strenght of Immortals vs hydras and vultures.
On the other hand Solution 2 also has the advantage of nerfing the Immortal which may actually be good as it simply could be too dominating late game over the Stalker due to its supply efficiency.
|
I would prefer solution two.
Not to big of a deal against hydras and lurkers, dont know.
Five shots vs six shots against vultures adds up and can be important.
Since immortal is 30% stronger than dragoon, shouldnt his buildtime get increased by 30% also?
He is 50bt now, shouldnt he be 60?
dragoon 45/3=15.
45+15=60
Though, in a real game i dont think this is viable.
@vulture
Once you learn his logic, you can control him better.
For example, while he moves around, you cant manual target anything but you can shoot while move.
|
On September 19 2013 00:13 Kabel wrote:
We now have Fighting Spirit as a playable version of the Test map.
There is also a Unit Tester Test map
we need to go deeper!! 
I honestly like the immortal/stalker system better than the dragoons. It just feels a bit more fluent. I cant explain exactly why but I think that the dragoon is more boring to watch too. In a perfect world though, we would have a playce for all 3 of these units.
|
On September 19 2013 19:25 Foxxan wrote:
I would prefer solution two.
Not to big of a deal against hydras and lurkers, dont know.
Five shots vs six shots against vultures adds up and can be important.
Since immortal is 30% stronger than dragoon, shouldnt his buildtime get increased by 30% also?
He is 50bt now, shouldnt he be 60?
dragoon 45/3=15.
45+15=60
Though, in a real game i dont think this is viable.
@vulture
Once you learn his logic, you can control him better.
For example, while he moves around, you cant manual target anything but you can shoot while move.
Yeh mathematically bt should be 60. However, I suggested 55 to Kabel as it may have larger consequences to have an inflexible production cycle (where you don't get units constantly - but less frequently). 50 is definitely too low though.
I honestly like the immortal/stalker system better than the dragoons. It just feels a bit more fluent. I cant explain exactly why but I think that the dragoon is more boring to watch too. In a perfect world though, we would have a playce for all 3 of these units.
Surprised you changed your mind. 
I think the explanation is that Dragoons vs mech is something we saw so much in BW, and while its a good solid matchups, it does bring a bit extra flavour when we have two different units (as long as it is balanced).
You kinda said it your self after we played that game on FS; "this feel exactly like BW".
|
Yeh mathematically bt should be 60. However, I suggested 55 to Kabel as it may have larger consequences to have an inflexible production cycle (where you don't get units constantly - but less frequently). 50 is definitely too low though.
Hmm, mathematically the damage should be
9.75 x2 vs medium
6.5 x2 vs light
60~ BT
With longer build time on the immortal, i believe it will create an uncertainly for toss vs terran.
120 seconds = two immortals
90 seconds = two dragoons
Which you can split on different locations to defend/attack. While with Immortal you only have one at that time.
I to like more flavor for protoss, iam not really disliking this stalker/immortal thing, but i dont understand while we simple do not have the normal dragoon instead of immortal for balance play and than the stalker also. Ínstead of trying to balance stalker/immortal = dragoon,
With normal dragoonn, we can look at the stalker more freely even.
Why not have him on gateway for example. Mix his stats up, Easier?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
