EPTWithout any macro mechanic, this takes 422,5 seconds for all races.
You sure? In theory, it should be longer for zerg
[A] Starbow - Page 440
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
You sure? In theory, it should be longer for zerg | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
On October 08 2013 03:13 Foxxan wrote: You sure? In theory, it should be longer for zerg Ah, I just realized it now. It takes 24x19,5 seconds to build 24 Drones. That equals 468 seconds. (Due to larva spawn time) But in return, the more larva they have acess to, the faster can they saturate new bases. This is also another aspect of both P and T saturation. Both races can easier saturate new bases via Rift and Calldown SCV. (Makes workers come there faster.) But that advantage is still kept by Z due to Inject. Edit: And more hatches. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
Yes, I can try this in a test map. I can have it up tomorrow, since I want to try the Roach again anyway. I think there are some interesting things in your suggestion. Sounds cool. I think the main benefit of the Immortal vs mech is that it allows us to buff the Vulture vs Dragoons, which opens up a role for the Stalker to be a "high-damage dealer" vs Vultures. This means that we can maintain the medium armor type of Stalkers (which makes them good vs Hydralisks). Further, it also adds a bit of differentaiting to the the unit counters to the roach compared to the unit counter to the Lurker. Vs Roaches, Immortals will do a very good job, and it isn't a neccesity (but optional) to get Dragoons vs them. But vs heavy lurker play, Immortals aren't particularly usefull due to its lower range, so adding Dragoons vs them is very much rewarded. So even though this means that there are 4 core units in the game, it will (at least vs terran) give more well-refined unit roles. So basically I imagine that this will be the role for each protoss core unit; Zealot: Buffer unit vs Maurauder, Hydralisks and tanks + decent damage vs everything. Immortal: Buffer unit vs Marines, Roaches and Vultures and too a lesser extent Tanks, Hydralisks and Maurauders. Mediocore damage vs everything. Stalker: Damage dealer vs Vulture + can blink on top of Tanks. Dragoon: Damage dealer vs Siege Tanks and Maurauders. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
But that advantage is still kept by Z due to Inject. That advantage comes from more hatcheries | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
If the overall saturation time is too fast in Sbow, maybe should workers gain 1 or 2 extra seconds build time. To avoid bases being saturated too fast with the help of macro mechanics. So with this change, you wanna increase the larva spawn rate also? | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
(kind of a generic point, but since Blizzard never bothered to even reduce inject larva from four to three I'm always worried that people don't consider these things :o ) | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
Such a difficult unit to get right. Previously we have tried two variations where neither really has worked out very well. Variation 1: Starts with fast movement speed + high single damage (and long range). Splash damage requires upgrade. Problem with this variation is that it makes it very efficient at preventing drop play early game. This was a larger issue with the old Sbow econ. Today it probably wouldn't be that bad, but IMO it is still unnecesary, and it also prevent dropships too easily in TvT. Variation 2: Starts with splash damage. Low damage, but movement speed upgrade. Problem with this variation is that it give terran easy early acces to antimutalisk play which IMO is bad for both balance and gameplay. Thus, I think the next thing we should try for the Viking is to move it away from the early midgame by putting a Fusion Core requirement on it. Yes I know that we then will have 3 units requiron that tech - but we can live with that. Then we can keep the current stats of the Vikings and give zerg some type of anti-irraidate ability which should synergize better with Guardians than with Mutalisks. The logic here is that Irradiate is more fun vs Mutalisks than vs Guardians. Vs Mutalisks, zerg can at least micro to minimize damage taken. Vs Guardians, mass Irriadate just feel like mass rape. So by giving Vikings a main role vs Guardians and more of a late game soft counter vs Mutalisks, I believe we create the best type of gameplay and balance. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9419 Posts
On October 08 2013 04:19 Grumbels wrote: If zerg has too much larva available they can just mass drone and the game becomes boring that way (see SC2). If they have less larva they can always build units to spend their minerals, so it's not like the race will be gimped. Or they can make macro hatcheries. I would advise caution in buffing larva spawn rate, although it's possible for it to be too low obviously. (kind of a generic point, but since Blizzard never bothered to even reduce inject larva from four to three I'm always worried that people don't consider these things :o ) Agree. Larva spawn rate and mules are IMO what forces protoss to play such a turtlish style in Sc2. Protoss always have less stuff in midgame (unless they all in), and thus they need to play a turtle-mass style which is super boring. The simple reason why TvZ is the most actionpacked matchup is due to terran neutralizing zerg econ with super fast 3rd OC. Thus, tvz is the only matchup where both players have similar econ in the midgame. Really hope Blizzard realizies the correlation between actionpacked games and similiarity in economy betwen the two races before LOTV is realised. | ||
|
Sumadin
Denmark588 Posts
Sorry, i am sorry just letting off some steam. I am good. Vikings current design is that they are quick and accesable defense vs mass mutas and i don't actually mind that. It is a decent trade-off from Terran having less general answers to mutas from other units. I don't really think we need to change that given how devastating a quick muta switch can be, due to the nature of terran production. Protoss and Zerg are just better suited to make a decent anti-muta force in a hurry. Thus the anti-muta units of terran needs to be better, because they cannot get them as fast. If anything this new macro mechanic will be a nerf to vikings since you would have to "spend" reactors on a relativly weak unit, that you otherwise wouldn't want to be built. And if you really want fusion core involved... well they are going to get them anyway due to SVs... If anything i think an upgrade on the FC, "Plutonium engines" that maybe ties some of the current vikings speed to an upgrade would be better. They would need to be faster post-upgrade than they are now through. Maybe even as fast as mutas. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
It is indeed very strong and too impactful on the current balance. We see some broken timings with double Tanks produced from one Factory etc. Need to find a better way to balance it. Looking at different ways now. I thought you were going to try my version of the stalker? Test map? Ah, double promise. : / I will see what gets tried in the test map. First need to get the macro mechanics to work properly. So with this change, you wanna increase the larva spawn rate also? Nothing is decided. If all saturation time is too fast now, a potential way is to slightly increase worker production. Maybe larva needs a tiny increase too, so the ratio is kept Edit: Replay with new Terran mechanic used in action: http://drop.sc/361682 | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Maybe larva needs a tiny increase too, so the ratio is kept I think it would be a hard nerf for zerg this way. | ||
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Denmark697 Posts
Instead, how about this - Barracks can produce 3 units (including the one in normal production) before the reactor runs out, BC's can't be reactored and the reactor now costs 50 energy. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
I would suggest the following (if possible): Reactor builds 2 units, both with 100% speed when it comes to SCVs and Marines. Reactor builds 2 units, 1st unit at 100% speed, but the 2nd unit only at 50%-75% speed: for reapers, marauders, medivacs etc (medium cost units). Reactor builds 2 units, 1st unit at 100% speed, but the 2nd unit only at 25%-50% speed: for tanks, BCs, Ravens etc. Example: When you build 2 tanks. 1st tank will build at a 100% rate and 2nd tank at 50% rate. When the first tank finishes, reactor is turned off and the 2nd tank resumes building at 100% rate (but already 50% finished). At that point you can reactor the factory again if you like. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
If that means every units' build speed has to be scaled down, I am for it. 50 energy too high. It should be maximum 25, and scaled accordingly. Whether you have to change worker build times or whatever to make it so. Though maybe you still want other abilities to be used on Queen/OC/Nexus. In which case... my advice is bad. But you know my argument by now. I don't think a macro mechanic needs to be anything other than very apm-taxing and attention grabbing/disturbing. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
It is the most advanced macro mechanic we have, in terms of the way it works in the editor. So I am restricted by the limitations in the editor and my own skill level. Not sure what has potential to work or not. LaLush suggestion above - That would be a good way to balance it. But I do not know how to make the ability apply a different effect depending on what unit is being trained. MAYBE could it be possible to make Unit number 2 ALWAYS be trained 50% slower. (No matter what type of unit it is.) An easier way, which I know is possible to do, is to make Barrack, Factory and Starport train units at different speed. For example, if you drop Overcharge on the Barrack, 2 units are produced at 100% speed. If you use Overcharge at a Factory, 2 units are produced at 75% speed? Or all units in all structures are produced at 75% speed? It is still faster to have 2 units at 75%, than it is to have 1 unit at 100%. (for example) 1 Tank = 44 sec build time 2 Tanks built after each other = 88 sec total build time 2 Tanks built with reactor buff = 66 sec total build time. (If Overcharge is used immediately when the two Tanks start) However, this would also mean that if you drop Overcharge on a structure, and only produces 1 unit, it will still be produced at a slower pace. So if T wants to finish 1 specific unit out quickly, its better to NOT use Overcharge. (The opposite of Chrono boost.) But on the other hand, macro mechanics should IMO be as simple and fast paced as possible. Chrono boost, Nurturing Swarm and Inject are easy in that regard - increase production time or larva spawn rate by X% during Y seconds. Smaller solutions for Overcharge: - Each Overcharge costs 25 energy and 25 minerals? - While a structure produces 2 units at the same time, it takes high damage every second?? (SCVs must repair it.) - haha Another solution for Overcharge: - It increases production speed on target Barrack, Factory, or Starport by X% during Y seconds. Yes, it is Chrono boost. But we can add some twist to differentiate it from CB. And sooo much easier to balance. CB - Can be used on workers, army, reserach and Photon cannons. Overcharge - Can be used on Barrack, Factory and Starport. If we keep Tech Lab/Reactor, it gives a double effect to structures with a Reactor. (Imba??) Perhaps can it also be used on Supply depots to give a temporary bonus. Extra durability? Nah these are no brilliant ideas. Just random thoughts. I will continue to ponder all night long långkalsong, hm hm hm.. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Later on, when things stabilize, we can try to invite more new players. Its not fun to show a half completed game to new people. : / A couple of more weeks and I think we will be good to go. My to-do-list is shorter now than ever before. (But still stuff to do) | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
| ||
