|
Just a quick note before we continue:
If we want the game done quick, we shall not mess anything with the BW core balance. It gives us this game:
>>>+ Show Spoiler +Terran
Marine
Firebat
Medic - Matrix + potential 1 more spell
Reaper - Bombs
Ghost - Potential for 1 more spell
Vulture
Tank
Goliath
Viking
Banshee
Dropship
Vessel - Nerve jammer
BC - stronger
Zerg
Zergling
Baneling
Hydralisk
Lurker
Mutalisk
Scourge
Viper - new spells
Defiler
Ultra
Guardian
Devourer - potential for new spell
Protoss
Zealot
Dragoon
DT
HT
Observer - new ability
Warp Prism - warp in
Reaver
Corsair - Graviton beam?
Scout - Phase missile?
Sentinel - new spells
Carrier
Arbiter
Warp gate for Zealot, HT and DT.
No Stalker, Marauder, Roach.
Probably get balanced and fixed macro mechanics back in the game.
The game should be done within a few weeks, since much of the BW balance is intact, and it should not be too much editor work required.
If we however want each race to have an extra core unit - Marauder, Stalker & Roach, this is how the game will look:
>>>+ Show Spoiler +Marine
Marauder
Firebat
Medic - Matrix + potential 1 more spell
Reaper - Bombs
Ghost - Potential for 1 more spell
Vulture
Tank
Goliath
Viking
Banshee
Dropship
Vessel - Nerve jammer
BC - stronger
Zerg
Zergling
Baneling
Hydralisk
Roach
Lurker
Mutalisk
Scourge
Viper - new spells
Defiler
Ultra
Guardian
Devourer - potential for new spell
Protoss
Zealot
Dragoon
Stalker
DT
HT
Observer - new ability
Warp Prism - warp in
Reaver
Corsair - Graviton beam?
Scout - Phase missile?
Sentinel - new spells
Carrier
Arbiter
Warp gate for Zealot, Stalker, HT and DT.
I find this alternative a lot more interesting if we get it right, especially for mirror match-ups.
But it is also muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch harder.
We can either:
- Adjust BW core units balance to fit with the new units. (which is what we do now.)
- Add those units at a higher tech in the game so they do not affect the BW balance too early. And we avoid touching any BW unit at all. (Stalker requires Twilight, Roach requires Lair, Marauder requires E-bay?)
- Do ALL this work in a test map. So we have one version heavily BW, one version with extra core units. Normal Sbow maps remain quite unchanged, as in the spoiler above. (Apart from the unfinished spells.) Then we see what is more fun to play.
- Or just let it be..
This is eseentially what we are trying to do:
>>>+ Show Spoiler +<<<
Another approach is to just complete the game, even though it is a lot like BW. (Forget about Stalker, Marauder etc.) Then we release an expansion if anyone still cares to play this 6 months from now 
T.H.O.U.G.H.T.S?   
|
The fix with the SC2 units and BW units should be the standard one to be released imo. If I just want broodwar units ill play sc2bw.
|
On October 11 2013 21:53 Weerwolf wrote:
The fix with the SC2 units and BW units should be the standard one to be released imo. If I just want broodwar units ill play sc2bw.
Yeh I think it shuld be the standard when released. However, I think on the real map it is important we have a decent balance there. The real map should consist of stuff we are quite convinced works - I think ppl in general I quite sceptics when new experiments (that doesn't work) are implemented on the real map. However, they will be more willing to accept broken stuff on the test map.
I suggest we experiment with macromechanics and Roach + Stalker + Vulture as light unit on the test map for now (vulture medium on real map).
Then we feel this has a proper balance we can implement them to the real map.
Regardless, stuff like Viking also needs a fix ASAP (on both maps). Playing mech without Viking is probably a bit weak but with Viking atm it is quite OP (but super fun though).
These two areas (core units + Vikings) should probably have highest priority atm.
Then later on, we can go into smaller areas such as;
- Tweaking Sentinel
- Scout (IMO phase missile doesn't fit this unit if we want phase missile to be viable vs bio)
- Devourer.
- Viper
(Immortal at robo maybe?)
|
I am thinking of doing some math aruond macro mechanics according to LaLush's idea.
Let each race have a weak spammy macro mechaninc. I am thinking like queens do 30% or 50% over a shorter duration, chornoboost only last like 10 sec and calldown SCV cost 50 energy.
Kabel, want me to do math on this and get some numbers, or is this diea bad from the start?
|
On October 12 2013 00:09 Xiphias wrote:
I am thinking of doing some math aruond macro mechanics according to LaLush's idea.
Let each race have a weak spammy macro mechaninc. I am thinking like queens do 30% or 50% over a shorter duration, chornoboost only last like 10 sec and calldown SCV cost 50 energy.
Kabel, want me to do math on this and get some numbers, or is this diea bad from the start?
Is this really fun? I personally find calling down mules to be one of the most pointless things in the game. And if macromechanics become too hard I fear that most casual players will be more occupied by macro'ing rather than attacking/harassing opponents --> More stale games.
|
Yes, please do!
(To see how we can get it even. Then it ofc depends on how spammy we want them to be. But cooldown and energy are variables we can tweak to adjust that?)
Terran macro is still uncertain. If calldown reactor shall work it needs to be a lot weaker. The problem is that its not as easy to change values with it, due to the way it works. Unless T just gets some kind of Chrono boost, which gives a direct effect on the trained unit..
Ps. The Roach + Vulture light + Stalker thing got moved to the test map. So normal Sbow should have decent balance again. (Since core game is almost BW) I also did a super quick fix to the Viking - it starts with speed 3.25 but can upgrade additional speed. Not as insane as soon as it comes into play. I will try to work more with the actual attack. Perhaps missiles can be dodged, or it has to stand still or something.
Off to work now for the evening.
|
Kabel, how would you feel about IF Lalush's idea of intensifying macro mechanics were implemented together with a removal of the ability to have more than 1 building in a Control Group AND Smartcast?
I think that way of changing the macro mechanics would replicate the function of "no automine" quite well and with those 2 other changes I believe it would make more room for players to, as mentioned earlier in this thread, be able to excel in specific areas like macro or micro. I think that it's too easy to perfect the macro area at the moment and that you're not required enough to switch your camera between your base and the battlefield.
|
On October 12 2013 00:46 Jawra wrote:
Kabel, how would you feel about IF Lalush's idea of intensifying macro mechanics were implemented together with a removal of the ability to have more than 1 building in a Control Group AND Smartcast?
I think that way of changing the macro mechanics would replicate the function of "no automine" quite well and with those 2 other changes I believe it would make more room for players to, as mentioned earlier in this thread, be able to excel in specific areas like macro or micro. I think that it's too easy to perfect the macro area at the moment and that you're not required enough to switch your camera between your base and the battlefield.
while i could agree that making macro harder can be good for the game on the pro level, it should not be looked at the same as removing smart-cast. Making it harder for player to macro will not have an impact on balance, it will however raise the skill ceiling.
Removing smart-cast is much more important because it has an impact on the balance and on the way the game is played. Removing smart-cast allows spells to be stronger and thus be much more cost-effective for defense in the right hands. It also nerfs the massing of spellcasters like vessels.
So if we are considering either of these we should not look at them combined.
About gossen's post:
I think we should at least stick to BW balance for tier 1, tier 2 roach and stalker can be considered (marauder doesn't seem the have a negative impact on tier 1 balance), but allowing tier 1 roach and stalker will make it too much rock-paper-scissors.
But I'm still not a fan of roach/stalker in their current design, stalker needs to be really different from the dragoon to be a useful addition, otherwise either dragoon or stalker will be preferred always or you make both but control them the same => nothing got really added. Same goes for roach.
I'd rather focus on fixing the supporting units like corsair/scout/sentinel/viking/viper/... and of course the never ending problem: the spider mine.
|
On October 12 2013 00:18 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2013 00:09 Xiphias wrote:
I am thinking of doing some math aruond macro mechanics according to LaLush's idea.
Let each race have a weak spammy macro mechaninc. I am thinking like queens do 30% or 50% over a shorter duration, chornoboost only last like 10 sec and calldown SCV cost 50 energy.
Kabel, want me to do math on this and get some numbers, or is this diea bad from the start?
Is this really fun? I personally find calling down mules to be one of the most pointless things in the game. And if macromechanics become too hard I fear that most casual players will be more occupied by macro'ing rather than attacking/harassing opponents --> More stale games.
This is more about toning down the importance of macro mechanics rather than making them more spammy.
Math time!
Basic idea
That macro mechanics should not be vital for casual play but give the hardcore player a slight edge if he is diligent in using the mechanics. Also to make all races fairly equal in overall extra workers given by using the macro mechanics since they all now need to buy and upgrade to begin the macro (OC, CB upgrade and Queen)
Current numbers
Well, the mechanics are removed but the numbers are still there. This is not so very exciting so I will spoil it:
+ Show Spoiler +Worker build time = 17,6 sec (not 18)
Larvae spawn rate = 19,5 sec
25 energy = 44,4 sec to regenerate
CB = 100 % increase over 10 sec (yes, that is right, Kabel buffed that one)
Inject larvae= 60 % increase over 40 sec.
Tests and results
I am not going to into all the math here, but keep in mind that putting an "accelerated state" on time (like CB and queen inject) by a certain % does not reduce the build time by that % (read more here: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Chrono_Boost_Math) so I have taken that into consideration.
Suggested numbers:
Zerg
Inject larva = Accelerate larva spawn rate by 70 % over 20 sec.
Result: Mean value of 14,8 seconds per larvae spawn.
Protoss
Chrono boost = Accelerate build time by 100% over 10 sec
Result: Mean value of worker build time = 14.36 sec
Terran
Call down SCV with a 80 sec cooldown and no energy required.
Result: Mean value of worker build time = 14.44 sec
Comment on terran: The time needed to force the player from casting a new SCV would amount to 45 energy SCV's which I think is too much energy for one worker. I'd rather see the other stuff (scan and reactor) cost more energy and let the SCV just have a cooldown. Letting the SCV cost 45 energy would give the same result in terms of mean value worker build time.
General thoughts
I like it when the macro ability is fast but short. You "feel" it more, but it actually does less and it is easier to balance. These numbers may be too good for macro not to matter as much but they are at least fairly balanced in terms of workers built.
The problem with trying to make macro even worse is the SCV calldown. The cooldown would have to be SO LONG and the SCV would be more discrete which makes the mean matter less and hence they get the short end of the stick. 80 sec is long enough...
|
With the current way macromechanis are designed, scv calldown needs to be way stronger than chrono boost due to higher fixed fee + benefiting less from extra workers due to having fewer bases.
The cooldown doesn't really matter as much as the energy cost now that you can use energy on reactorboost. So increasing the CD by quite a lot, won't be a true nerf as you can just spend energy on reactoradd on then.
Bascially this means that we should balance scv calldown + reactor calldown on energy cost - not cooldown! We also need to take into account that the energy cost is being shared with scan, which implies that terrans macromechanics should be even more efficient than CB. Thus, below is IMO the desired relative strenght of the macromechanics;
- Scv calldown 50% more efficient than CB on nexus
- Reactor-calldown 25-75% more efficient than CB on gateways
- Production booster needs to be stronger than the ecobooster (as it seems atm that ecoboosters are too favored in the early game)
Suggested changes
1) Increase CB efficiency on gateways to 100% over 15 seconds from 100% over 10 seconds. CB on Nexus is unchanged.
2) Increase scv calldown energy cost from 25 to 30 --> Scv calldown is now 46% more energyefficient than CB
3) Reactor-calldown efficieny is at 100% on rax. 60% on factory. 50% on Starport --> 25 energy.
Effect
Assuming reactor-calldown is being used perfectly on the below units, then we will see these relationships;
- Marine production is 33% more efficienct than CB on gateway.
- Siege tank production is 76% more efficient than CB on gateway units.
- Vulture will be 20% more efficient.
- Using reactoraddon perfectly on a Marine is a 36% more efficienct than calling down scv's --> Ecoboosts have been nerfed.
- Using CB on gateway instead of Nexus is 50% more efficient.
These seems pretty decent. Obviously Vultures get a bit of the short end of the stick. Siege tanks on the other hand can be produced at a much faster pace.
Inject
Inject isn't comparable to chrono + larva inject as it works as an alternative to a macro hatch. Thus, the decision should be calculated on the difference in efficiency between building 2 queens instead of one macro hatch. This is quite a complicated matter and not really relevant to caluculate IMO. Especially since Queen IMO still need a true alternative to larva inject ( which means you then can't inject constantly).
So instead of basing this suggestion on math, I just base it on "good-feeling";
1) Larva inject boost increased from 60% to 65%
2) Queens default attack removed
3) At a cost of 25 energy, queen can activate its attack (slightly stronger than the current version).
Risks
With these changes I kinda like the fact that production gets buffed a bit and that all macromechanics have true opportunity costs, however it may still be possible that certain timings will be too strong. E.g. getting out fast tanks could be OP in some situations?
|
I find this alternative a lot more interesting if we get it right, especially for mirror match-ups.
But it is also muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch harder
About adding stalker/roach/marauder.
I cant see the fun if the stalker overlaps 75% with dragoon in style.
Would it be fun if protoss got a new combat unit that doesnt resemble dragoon? Yes. If he adds something to them.
Or if roach becomes unique for zerg but doesnt add anything, whats the point?
Right now, the roaches approach, superlow damage to armored. Is incorrect choice in my eyes. And iam talking about when it was 75% to armored. The unit doesnt get unique just because his stats are different.
If dragoon do 20damage to armored,
stalker do 10 to armored. This doesnt make them unique units, still the same
Having them all on tier 1->messystyle with coinflips. Why have this? Why would it be fun with randomness? And making dragoon/Stalker from second one its available<- whats so fun about this when they are the same?
To make changes to a game like this, you need experience in the matchups. In the meta. Know why people play like they play.
It feels like you lack a gameplan. The stats on a unit should not come first, it should come in a later stage. What should come first is a picture of how it plays how, how it truly affects the mu or race.
1) Why make this unit
2) What will the unit accomplish
If you cant picture this at all, then its superhard.
The less you know the harder it is and that makes it much more important to stay with the logic that bw has (not to mix in random logics), or else it will get confusing and more confusing.
Right nwo, it has become rather messy
You havent taken advantage of the testmap at all kabel. You put in a change like nerfing the dragoon speed, you even put the stalker in there with chaos stats.
You say you have small time, yet changes happen regularly
Its changes onto changes, and it usually never feels like a step forward, only backwards.
|
Hider, I don't really see your arguments about energy being shared. Chronoboost is also shared with rift and chrono on buildings which are not the nexus which is similar to reactor cooldown. Protoss have the same problem and the initial cost is almost identical atm. I can agree that SCV calldown should be better than chronoboost due to number of bases but 50% is quite heavy.
Also if we want the SCV to cost energy then it cannot be 25. That simply does not compute, Terran will blow the other races out of the water and then they have to compensate by having really good macro mechanics which in turn works against the point of letting macro mechanincs matter less. The problem then is that it has to be 50 energy, which is waaay too much. That's why I am suggesting just a cooldown which is much easier to balance and then the energy decision will be between reactor and scan. This means that both of the two should cost more energy since you won't use any for SCV. Maybe 50 for scan and 50/75 for reactor, depending on how good we make the reactor ability.
|
|
|
3) Reactor-calldown efficieny is at 100% on rax. 60% on factory. 50% on Starport --> 25 energy.
This change i would like across the board for zerg and protoss to.
It would change the game quite drastic in fun ways.
- New bo
- New strategies
Would probably make action start sooner, more agressive play.
|
Hider, I don't really see your arguments about energy being shared. Chronoboost is also shared with rift and chrono on buildings which are not the nexus which is similar to reactor cooldown. Protoss have the same problem and the initial cost is almost identical atm. I can agree that SCV calldown should be better than chronoboost due to number of bases but 50% is quite heavy.
We need to compare the strenght of macromechanics relative to what happened in BW. In BW there was no opportunity cost to scan (after initial investment it was free). Here there is an opportunity cost (other macro mechanics).
Protoss on the other hand doesn't get any extra opportunity cost compared to what they had in BW. For instance even if protoss uses all energy on nexus they can still do exact same thing as in BW. For terran that is different as they will have fewer scans available than they had in BW.
Also if we want the SCV to cost energy then it cannot be 25. That simply does not compute, Terran will blow the other races out of the water and then they have to compensate by having really good macro mechanics which in turn works against the point of letting macro mechanincs matter less
Well I suggested 30. That is 46% better than Nexus chrono. Maybe 35 will lead to better balance - tough to say.
The problem then is that it has to be 50 energy, which is waaay too much. That's why I am suggesting just a cooldown which is much easier to balance and then the energy decision will be between reactor and scan. This means that both of the two should cost more energy since you won't use any for SCV. Maybe 50 for scan and 50/75 for reactor, depending on how good we make the reactor ability.
50 energy makes it less efficient than chrono nexus which adds 10 seconds less to worker production (scv caldown adds 17.6 seconds). 45 energy will make scv calldown equally as efficient as CB on nexus.
However, then your also assuming that;
1) Investment fees for nexus upgrade and OC are the same
2) Terran can benefit to the same degree from extra workers
3) That there is no extra opportunity cost related to stuff terran could in BW (the shared scan thing).
Taking into account that none of these assumptions are true, this leads me to believe that the Scv calldown needs to be 40-50% stronger than CB on nexus.
|
@ Storm on test map
I think we should go back here to damage over 6 seconds if we keep the Stalker (as it makes toss a bit stronger without AOE).
This is especially important as Psy storm benefits quite a lot from smartcast.
I also like this value in general as it gives more time for players to split rather than just one-second micro.
|
@ hider
Rather separate energy for macro mechanics and scan rather than share the energy and make macro mechanics OP for terran. Scan is barely used in the earlygame/ early-midgame so terran benefits a lot from having stronger macro mechanics (see early pushes), also terran and toss are on equal bases till early midgame, where toss might take a quicker third, so workers relative to basecount is not an issue here, it will only be relevant in the mid/lategame.
Terran in bw delayed comsat station for quite a while if they could.
Also, like foxxan pointed out, if you lengthen dragoon range upgrade because toss can chrono it out faster then you're forcing toss to not use chrono on econ to still have the same range timing as in bw, while terran can get siegetanks + siege mode out quicker than in bw (barracks switch) and is much more efficient at holding of this type of harrasment than in bw (marauders available etc).
In fact dragoon range comes out so late right now that it doesn't even matter if you actually scout for tosses chrono distribution or not. Having it shorter is only good for the game, makes it relevant for the terran to actually scout the toss and look if he chrono's the cyber core (like you'd watch for in sc2 for the warpgate timing).
|
@kabel
The game has smartcasting, workers autorally and uus(unlimited unit selection), while slower gamespeed.
You say you want more skilldiffrence-> wouldnt it make sence to increase gamespeed to bw speed?
If we want the game done quick, we shall not mess anything with the BW core balance. It gives us this game
But you have already messed with bw core balance:
Matrix on medic
Barack requires no academy, instead techlab <- which is more of a nerf than a buff to bioterran.
You say you want action, yet this change is the opposite cuz upgrading techlab on barack = less units
Terran can do the barack techlab trick->factory=faster siegetanks, faster upgrades.
Terrans scan shares energy
Corsair - graviton beam
Scout - mana burn
These stuff are all relevant.
|
What are the energy costs for all those abilities (macro mechanics) xiphias? Having a hard time getting a proper oversight.
So terran have both reactor and an SCV calldown?
What's the energy, duration and cooldown for everything atm?
|
Holy shit. I just got the unitester to work.
I tried the hybrid destroyer, and the hybrid dominator.
They feel good to play with!
They already have tons of animations.
Could seriously see they work much better than stalker/immortal for protoss at robotic.
The destroyer autoattack is what i had in mind with my spell idea actually, they have similarities
@kabel
Goliath with transform(airform, cant shoot only move).
I think it can actually work well. Even with a buffed damage to armored units.
It threatens dragoons->toss needs more variation in opening(pure dragoons dont work all the time)
You are scared of balance? Or you dont like it?
Tbh, i think its fixable this. The balance will be in tvp mu, not tvz cuz its only a 3damage buff to hydralisks, and we can make abduct work vs air units (goliaths air)
Hybrid destroyer->
10 explosive damage,
bounces 100/150/200%.
Armored unit
Good vs siegetanks and goliaths., and affects mechanical units only(bounce dont work vs hovers)
Could have another spell that affects bio only, it doesnt break the logic either. With this unit good vs mechanical. A nerf to arbiters statis.
The meta in pvt is rush to arbiters for toss always right now
Make him able to move up/down cliffs, to complete with more mobile stuff and to be able to put on some agression.
You dont like any of these?
By doing two spells (one vs mechanical, one vs bio), it doesnt break any logic.
And much easier to balance than getting one spell work versus every race.
Look at irridaite, it only works on bio units, and ghosts lockdown only works on mechanical.
The new unit is actually unique here, doesnt wanna take over dragoons role.
I really think this would be really cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/76jLozZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pmW8qUo.jpg)
