|
On September 24 2013 22:36 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +Scv calldown should be better than chrono though. Otherwise it just changes the risk/reward too much for protoss in favour of taking a quick 3rd I never thought about that fast third. Terran cant get a fast third? So as it is now, if scv calldown is better. Gives terran advantage. If they are equal, toss gets ahead. I dislike this alot
Two races with different economies and different base timings??????
BLASPHEMY
All jokes aside, uneven economy has been a vital part of balance since SC1 (not BW). It ok for races to not have carbon copy econ, as long as it fits thier unit timings. Zerg is the most extreme example of this with the cheap hatcheries and much faster potential worker production. On the other hand Zerg is unique in the way you have to sacrifice economy to get units, so any agressive game tends to hurt Zerg econ more than the other races.
So why is it not ok for Protoss and Terran to have somewhat different econ systems? As long as the races are still on even footing - due to unit and tech timings balancing the econ differences - this should be a source for diversity.
|
@Game speed
I am at the library and I should study. (Still no internet at home >.< ) But I just have to comment on the game speed:
It might be that units in Sbow generally are slower than in BW. And some of you consider that a problem.
Keep in mind that two important time factors are gone between BW and Sbow:
- unit selection limit
- units who block each other
Look at a large combat in BW. It feels like it lasts a long time. Which is good. More time in combat = more room for micro = more ways for the skilled player to determine the outcome of the combat = more fun.
To order 60 Hydras to attack the enemy required a lot of clicking. And that army management was time consuming. They also blocked each other. Which means that all Hydras did not reach the combat at the same time. And this helped to prolong the combats.
In Sbow we do NOT have those factors. This means that a large combat in Sbow will always end faster than a large combat in BW, if both games have the same speed.
I recommend you to try it. Attack with 60 Hydras vs 60 Hydras in Sbow. (Especially if the Sbow Hydras have exact BW speed.) Do the same thing in BW. Measure how long time it takes for the combats to end, from when you order the first Hydra to A-move. Experiment with it. Which of the two combats feel more fun to micro?
I fear that exact equal speed between BW and Sbow will make combats feel very lame in the SC2 engine. And there are IMO three things to do:
- Make Sbow be played on a generally lower game speed. Bad thing is that in non-combat situations units feel lame.
- Find ways to compensate the time consumed by the selection limit and horrible pathing.
- Redesign units so they fit better in the SC2 engine. (And make them add other elements of micro into combats.)
|
@kabel
I edited my post on page 415 about "punish dragoons.
I wrote "EDIT", so start there please (if u have read that post before)
|
On September 25 2013 00:11 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 22:36 Foxxan wrote:Scv calldown should be better than chrono though. Otherwise it just changes the risk/reward too much for protoss in favour of taking a quick 3rd I never thought about that fast third. Terran cant get a fast third? So as it is now, if scv calldown is better. Gives terran advantage. If they are equal, toss gets ahead. I dislike this alot Two races with different economies and different base timings?????? BLASPHEMY All jokes aside, uneven economy has been a vital part of balance since SC1 (not BW). It ok for races to not have carbon copy econ, as long as it fits thier unit timings. Zerg is the most extreme example of this with the cheap hatcheries and much faster potential worker production. On the other hand Zerg is unique in the way you have to sacrifice economy to get units, so any agressive game tends to hurt Zerg econ more than the other races. So why is it not ok for Protoss and Terran to have somewhat different econ systems? As long as the races are still on even footing - due to unit and tech timings balancing the econ differences - this should be a source for diversity.
Look at tvp wol. Terran is the agressor everygame the first 12-14min.
I dont call this diversity, i call this very sad gameplay
|
I have written a lot of things over the last week, and I am just gonna sum up the stuff I would like to see in the next patch;
For the Real map + test map
- Maurauder requires tech lab
- Vulture BT increased from 30 to 35 seconds
- Slight increase to cooldown of SCV Calldown
- Pylon HP increased to 300/300
- Robo cost reduced to 150/150
- Maurauder now takes multiple seconds to switch between Firebat mode and Maurauder mode. This is neccesary to make zealots just have a bit of utility vs bio. If zealots are good as buffer units, it means that protoss can actually fight straight up against bio with tier 2 tech).
For test Map only
- Immortal reduced in strenght + cost --> This is to reduce the efficiency of an Immortal "deathball". If Immortals cost less and are worse, then they will have to spread out over a larger radius which reduces the efficiency of massing Immortals --> Nerfing "terrible terrible damage".
- Roach implemented that synergize with Hydralisk at tier 1. At tier 2 they get a burrow speed ability.
- Hydralisk damage nerfed vs armored. Instead, I think they could get the range upgrade for free which takes into account that zerg now has extra infastructure costs as they "need" both a roach warren and a hydra den.
- Medi can heal much better while running
- Sentinel with avoidable Phase Missile (it IMO fits gameplay better that we give the ability to have a cheaper unit than the Scout, so Phase Missile can be used in the earlier phases of the game against Queens and Medi's.).
- Scout removed - This unit was always flawed in the sense that it was a super mobile air unit that hard countered a couple of units and was pretty allround'ish against most stuff. Immortal takes over its role as AA vs armored.
- Dirty had a great suggestion for Nullsphre that would make it possible to remicro against it. The idea is that when unit gets into a range of X of the Nullsphre a marker appears on the ground. This signals the direction of the Nulsphre attack. 2-3 seconds after, the attack ability is fired from The Nullsphre and it damages everything on its way to the mark. Thus, this opens up for much more remicro than the current solution. If it is possible to implemet it, it would be super awesome.
Otherwise, I would like to see a Sentinel damage buff against Medium from 5 to 6 to make it better vs Hydralisks.
|
On September 25 2013 00:32 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 00:11 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:On September 24 2013 22:36 Foxxan wrote:Scv calldown should be better than chrono though. Otherwise it just changes the risk/reward too much for protoss in favour of taking a quick 3rd I never thought about that fast third. Terran cant get a fast third? So as it is now, if scv calldown is better. Gives terran advantage. If they are equal, toss gets ahead. I dislike this alot Two races with different economies and different base timings?????? BLASPHEMY All jokes aside, uneven economy has been a vital part of balance since SC1 (not BW). It ok for races to not have carbon copy econ, as long as it fits thier unit timings. Zerg is the most extreme example of this with the cheap hatcheries and much faster potential worker production. On the other hand Zerg is unique in the way you have to sacrifice economy to get units, so any agressive game tends to hurt Zerg econ more than the other races. So why is it not ok for Protoss and Terran to have somewhat different econ systems? As long as the races are still on even footing - due to unit and tech timings balancing the econ differences - this should be a source for diversity. Look at tvp wol. Terran is the agressor everygame the first 12-14min. I dont call this diversity, i call this very sad gameplay
This. I think I actually first discovered this a month ago or so, but the problem with Sc2 is that the economic discrepancies comes way too early in the game. When terran has better income/more stuff all game long than the protoss player, the protoss player either has to go for a quick all in or simply turtle extremely heavily. If he is good at his job --> Game is stagnant.
The same concept is applied to ZvP.
|
@kabel
I edited my post on page 415 about "punish dragoons.
I wrote "EDIT", so start there please (if u have read that post before)
I re-read it now. Your ideas about Goliath/Viking - hybrid & new Protoss unit seem cool. But I will not add completely new units into Starbow. Or heavily rework existing ones. A completely new unit takes time to create, it must be playtested, balanced, discussed, playtested & balanced even more. It is incredible time consuming to get it right. The only new unit we have is the Sentinel. And it is still does not feel 100% perfect or natural. (With a new unit, I mean a unit that is neither in SC2 or BW)
I will make a post here tomorrow or the day after tomorrow where I list the areas of the game I think are left to fix, and what stuff in the game I think needs a second look. (Some of it have been discussed already, I notice) I have managed to squeeze in some hours in the editor during the weekend. And Dec is working at the file atm. So a new patch will come within a few days. More details soon.
Gotta go
|
@ecobooster and
Terran versus protoss
It will be very hard to balance this. What we have not considdered even right now is in broodwar, he needed to upgrade his scan which was 36Buildtime = two scvs lost
Also the cost of it was an academy = 150minerals, around 72sec buildtime
Scan upgrade on every command center= 50/50
So this is quite a heavy buff to terran.
This neglects dts alot, not entirely but still alot since it comes earlier and he will have atleast 25energy saved on one command center.
The nerf to this is the scan shares cooldown with other very important stuff.
Other stuff is the reactor for terran.
It costs 50/50 versus factory 200/100, and can be built from the baracks. Time saved and alot of money.
The last thing i wanna talk about is the techlab. In broodwar he needed academy to unlock medics from barack.
Now he needs to spend gas to start investing into medics bevcause he needs a tehclab on the baracks. So that is a concern about bio.
The other problem with the tech lab is:
You can build techlab on baracks, lift it off and lift your factory into this=36BT saved.
So the tank arrives 36seconds earlier here. Siege upgrade = 36seconds earlier.
Not only the siegetank, but you can start building vultures ealier and upgrade their upgrades earlier also.
We need to do something about this.
After we have solved this, why dont we do the scvcalldown like the chronoboost. This would give terran faster production which they lack right now.
I know, i like when they are not identical.
But there are some problems here, when protoss use chronoboost on his nexus, he have to make two probes or else the energy is a waste.
Terran dont have to do this, just simple use its cooldown and move on.
|
Very sad indeed, that new unit will not arrive
I think it would be easier to balance than stalker/dragoon/immortal.
And alot more fun also
But ofcourse i understand.
|
On September 25 2013 02:37 Foxxan wrote:
@ecobooster and
Terran versus protoss
It will be very hard to balance this. What we have not considdered even right now is in broodwar, he needed to upgrade his scan which was 36Buildtime = two scvs lost
Also the cost of it was an academy = 150minerals, around 72sec buildtime
Scan upgrade on every command center= 50/50
So this is quite a heavy buff to terran.
This neglects dts alot, not entirely but still alot since it comes earlier and he will have atleast 25energy saved on one command center.
The nerf to this is the scan shares cooldown with other very important stuff.
Other stuff is the reactor for terran.
It costs 50/50 versus factory 200/100, and can be built from the baracks. Time saved and alot of money.
The last thing i wanna talk about is the techlab. In broodwar he needed academy to unlock medics from barack.
Now he needs to spend gas to start investing into medics bevcause he needs a tehclab on the baracks. So that is a concern about bio.
The other problem with the tech lab is:
You can build techlab on baracks, lift it off and lift your factory into this=36BT saved.
So the tank arrives 36seconds earlier here. Siege upgrade = 36seconds earlier.
Not only the siegetank, but you can start building vultures ealier and upgrade their upgrades earlier also.
We need to do something about this.
After we have solved this, why dont we do the scvcalldown like the chronoboost. This would give terran faster production which they lack right now.
I know, i like when they are not identical.
But there are some problems here, when protoss use chronoboost on his nexus, he have to make two probes or else the energy is a waste.
Terran dont have to do this, just simple use its cooldown and move on.
I suggest changes now for some of these problems you adressed:
Orbital Problem General: increase the buildtime of the Orbital 36 seconds + make it cost 100 minerals again or increase the cooldown of scv drop.
Orbital Problem regarding dts, and academy cost: I dont consider this as a problem because dts are stronger now too and in comparison you need scans for scouting, scvs AND detection now.
"Other stuff is the reactor for terran.
It costs 50/50 versus factory 200/100, and can be built from the baracks. Time saved and alot of money."
"We need to do something about this.
After we have solved this, why dont we do the scvcalldown like the chronoboost. This would give terran faster production which they lack right now.
I know, i like when they are not identical."
Those 2 statements sound very contradicting to me. Perhaps I dont understand them correctly...
Overall I think, too many changes at once are tried. I think we have a basis now where we dont have to rely on every single bit on bw balance. Like Arbiters dont need upgrade research and shares its tech with carriers, observers can come out earlier, lurkers do 22 damage instead of 20 and other little stuff, you can chronoboost out reavers. I dont want to turn this mod into sc1bw but I would like to see it an improvement and its own game as a worthy successor of it. Economics and production shouldnt be necessarily the same like in bw
|
Dts aint stronger.
Or you mean the five extra damage they do?
Thats nothing.
Ye, i said it was a nerf that scan share cooldown with "other important stuff".
Orbital Problem General: increase the buildtime of the Orbital 36 seconds + make it cost 100 minerals
You wanna add another 36seconds build time?
That makes sence, to get the buildtime of the scan included from bw.
What i mean is reactor is a big problem.
It do add faster production ,yes but only the first round of units, not later.
Overall I think, too many changes at once are tried. I think we have a basis now where we dont have to rely on every single bit on bw balance
But the "basis" is not balanced here, far from it.
|
|
|
<3 stream :D
physics = cant play, but vods are always good. Need more for youtube.
|
I'll highlight and export more stuff later today.
I've sent Dec's eco triggers to Kabel. More content about how they work and some BW comparisons will be edited into this post later today when I have more time.
Like now! This post will try to explain how Dec (and me a little) have broodwarified Starbow since there are several different approtches and some of the consequences that you are now experiencing. This might be long.
@ The approach.
Movement speed, mining time and attack speed has been calulated with real time. That is to say that you open up both games, set both to "fastest"and you look and measure with a normal clock. That is how Dec has done this. He has done this very meticulously but it will never be 100% perfect. This is why I suspect we feel that units move so slow.
The whole screen in BW was more zoomed in so if we replecate the movement speed excatly then they will look quite slow as the screen is zoomed out. Also, the maps in Sbow are larger as LaLush pointed out, so we should actually (if we are to keep this speed) shrink all the maps accordingly. This, however, might lead to less space to micro as not all units have been sized accordingly. Not sure how to solve this one the best. It is very difficult to balance correctly if we change movement speed.
@ New economy triggers
It has been pointed out that the SC2BW bouncing workers is not actually how BW workers behaved. This is how they behaved: When a worker (A) was trying to mine from a patch which was already occupied by worker (B) then A did one of two things:
1. He tried to find an open patch if there was one open at the exact moment he was discovering that B was mining from the first patch he tried.
2. If there were no open patches A would wait by B until he was done.
It should be easy to see that this system gives off more efficient mining than the previous system which is explained in spoiler:
+ Show Spoiler +In SC2BW and in Strabow atm workers try to find open patches if someone is "in their spot" even if nothing is open at the time they discover that their spot is occupied.
Now there are other factors as well. Workers in BW uses more time to initiate mining and they halt when they deliver the minerals. They also move less efficietn between minerals when looking for an open spot becasue of BW pathing. We cannot possibly replecate all of this without heavily affect other aspects of gameplay (make units take time to turn 180 deg etc.)
I have done some rough testing with these new triggers and it looks promising although it is not 100% equal to BW. I will work on fine tune this later when I have more time, but I think what we have sent off to Kabel should be implemented ASAP since it should be much better than what we have.
Eco testing
In my tests I set both games to fastest speed and just measure minutes with a stop watch. In other words, you cannot use the resource income tab and compare since that uses in-game time. I did this since Dec has been using the same method on the other values. Remember that all these values are not 100% exact as noting down minerals at certain times while the flow of minerals are streaming in will cause some erros.
BW first:
8 workers on 8 patches gives 530 minerals / minute (1 per patch)
16 workers on 8 patches gives 830 minerals / minute (2 per patch)
20 workers on 8 patches gives 960 minerals / minute (2.5 per patch)
24 workers on 8 patches gives 1130 minerals / minute (3 per patch)
New Sbow triggers:
8 workers on 8 patches gives 550 minerals / minute (1 per patch)
16 workers on 8 patches gives 930 minerals / minute (2 per patch)
20 workers on 8 patches gives 1050 minerals / minute (2.5 per patch)
24 workers on 8 patches gives 1100 minerals / minute (3 per patch)
These numbers have a margin error of at least +-50 minerals (so 24 workers may be the same for both BW and Sbow).
Since Sbow pathing is smarter the workers also become more effective, but this is overall very similar. We also see that Sbow reaches maximum saturation earlier than BW unfortunately :/. I will, like said work on some tweaking to get it to match further (and also get some better tests) but this is the initial results. I am very positive. I will calculate each workers efficiency later when I have more time.
Enjoy new Sbow eco!
|
|
|
@Unit movement speed is slower because the map we used to scale it to has different dimensions vs fighting spirit which we will probably end up scaling units towards (or maybe a smaller version of it).
There is one fundamental tradeoff with movement speed.
The faster units are, the less you can micro them and the easier they are able to gap close to ranged units.
In return, maps can be bigger for more detail, unit speed might look nicer.
Opposite is the case for vice versa.
I think unit speed could be increased a little bit. It's being looked into and discussed what should be done.
|
I also think unit movement speed could be increased slightly.
One problem with this are the workers. If they also get faster speed then harvest time must be increased to compensate, but then the third worker will be even less useful. You could solve this by not increasing worker speed but then pulling workers away from harass and suchlike scenarios becomes harder.
I think something should be done here, but we have to be very careful.
|
Thoughts on making CC first less safe
I tested 1 rax CC (gasless) against CC first and you actually had 125 gas slightly faster if you go CC first which means that it is easier to get out maurauders + tanks faster if you CC first than if you go 1 rax expand. This is a bit problematic as it means that Mauruaders with a tech lab requirement doesn't buff 1 rax expo relative to CC first. You can indeed get more marines out with 1 rax expand, but since Marines get raped by Stalkers they aren't particularly usefull (without maurauder support) early game.
So nerfing CC first without nerfing 1 rax expand even more, isn't gonna be simple. Multiple changes are needed.
Potential solution (both for test map and real map)
- Stalkers gets unlocked after Robo or Twilight tech --> Marines better early game vs protoss --> Buff 1 rax expand over CC first --> This could very well have uninteded consequences though as marine + tank push may perform a bit too well vs Immortals only on the test map --> Cyber core core cost reduction to 150 minerals may be needed then.
- Stalker BT reduced to 35 seconds (to make up for higher tech requirement).
- Maurauder require tech lab --> With CC first your barrack is being occupied with getting addons that you can switch to the factory. With 1 rax expand you can get out both marines, multiple addons (for factory switch) and a tech lab for the barrack that can be used for Maurauder production --> This is a bigger nerf to CC first.
- Robo cost reduced to 150/150 --> This accomplishes 3 things; 1) Buff protoss scouting options. 2) Buff protoss drop tech availability. 3) Reduce the tech cost of getting out Stalkers, so we still can see them in the early parts of the game.
But this is kind of a complicated/unclean solution and not sure whether it completely fixes the problem. Can't see any clean + awesome solution atm. though.
The boring solution;
- CC requires a barracks to be build --> Fixes the problem in a very simple way, however also reduces build order variety. It could also confuse new players as well.
|
On September 25 2013 15:19 Phyrigian wrote:
I've joined the starbow chat channel, but nobodys in it.
Am I missing something? I read the black box and of course how it works has changed, but i do believe i've done it right?
edit: group for channel. woops
most everyone plays on EU at ~6pm-1am CET, i think
make sure to join the chat channel and not the group
also Stalkers and Goons are the same speed. what gives?
edit - Hider, what about 1rax gas expands? or is that completely unviable?
|
On September 25 2013 18:48 Fishgle wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 15:19 Phyrigian wrote:
I've joined the starbow chat channel, but nobodys in it.
Am I missing something? I read the black box and of course how it works has changed, but i do believe i've done it right?
edit: group for channel. woops most everyone plays on EU at ~6pm-1am CET, i think make sure to join the chat channel and not the group also Stalkers and Goons are the same speed. what gives? edit - Hider, what about 1rax gas expands? or is that completely unviable?
Why wouldn't it be viable?
Problem is just that everything is inferior to CC first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
