EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XnqUvca.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LyUyOCl.png)
Not exact same remake , made for classic sc2 , but with few changes suitable for starbow.
[A] Starbow - Page 485
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
IeZaeL
Italy991 Posts
Not exact same remake , made for classic sc2 , but with few changes suitable for starbow. | ||
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Denmark697 Posts
On December 24 2013 05:20 Hider wrote: Collosus isn't intended as a hard-counter to siege tanks. Robo already has a bio-only counter. Collosus also isn't intended to be a pure vs mech unit only. Given the logic presented in your post, it would seem to make a lot more sense if you suggested to remove the Reaver instead. I think you misunderstood my post. I was not arguing that the Colossus should go because of its use vs mech (it's bad vs mech). I was arguing that there is no need for Immortals - especially with hardened shields. My point for the Colossus is the same as it has always been - it is horribly designed, and can't be made to fit because of mechanics such as cliffwalk and air vulnerability. It simply has too many strong mechanics combined with a huge incentive for hard counters. this means that no version of the Colossus can ever be made usable without completely dominating ground troops. The problem is most obvious when you compare it to Tanks: The enemy builds Colossi? Get anti air. The enemy builds tanks? Flank him/Drop his lines/catch him unsieged ect. The decision against Colossi are purely strategic and based on composition. Its one dimensional design. I know there are finesse to be applied, but the bulk of it is on the strategic side of playing. | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
On December 24 2013 07:07 IeZaeL wrote: Not exact same remake , made for classic sc2 , but with few changes suitable for starbow. If you send me the file I can re-port it to fit Starbow better. I am also thinking about adding rocks to the button left and top right to make for some more obvious natural expansions (e.i. the geysers in the original) | ||
|
IeZaeL
Italy991 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8A8hb10.png) | ||
|
Izerman
Sweden99 Posts
!!!!!! | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
If we redesign it abit. Like this: His scarabs do not hunt enemies, instead it shoots where the unit(s) stand(s) or stood. With this change, The reaver needs a button to manually target his scarab if he wants to. (Not the "a" button tho, another) Against scvs that runs away- the reavers can shoot infront of them. Against static defence, siegetanks, lurkers and against other reavers without warpprism it will have little to no change However, against fast units like stim marines, zerglings and even hydralisk(and some more, these are the most relevant) It will change alot. This will cause some balance problems in pvz lategame. However, i quite like this change on paper - what do others think? | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
@Dirty Reaver That might not be too shabby. It opens up more room for Colossus. Reaver is the more precise, but more powerful unit that requires a lot of babysitting. Starbow in general has gone towards much more apm intensive game play so it could make sense in the context of Starbow. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
| ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
And ye that might not be a bad idea, but maybe revert back to the old AOE if we're doing this. | ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Ok, puh. Finally back at a computer. I will explain my "plan" for the future and I will cover some topics discussed in this thread. I do aim to release Starbow on January 21. ("Release" means that I will try to get more exposure so more potential players can find out about this.) I choose the release date for two reasons: - It will be exactly 2 years since I made the first post in this thread. - Free up my life. This project is very time consuming for me, and I need to prioritize other IRL-stuff more. But as usual, I am not satisfied with everything in the game. A couple of units + spells can be improved further. Some of you think a lot of stuff needs more rework/improvement, while other think the game is kinda cool as it is. If I could I would surely continue working on this for 5 more years... Personally I think the following areas are important to take a second look at: - Ghost and its starting spell - Vessel starting spell - Robo unit - Protoss air And things like: Scourge turn rate, Zealot/Zergling/Marine delay-micro, balance & meta game, graphic improvements, properly written tooltips etc. Some of you want me to look at areas like: improve micro Plague, add Protoss Shield Battery, rework Abduct, rework Reaver attack, rework Viking and so on. Those things can be fun ways to improve the game. But I doubt I will have time to make all this in the editor + it must be playtested. And I have to put priority on things that are crucial for the game. (Like fix incompleted units, badly designed spells and horrible bugs.) Stuff that already are ok can remain ok. If I however manages to complete everything I think is super important, then I can look at those stuff. Here is my plan: >>>+ Show Spoiler + - Finalize as much as I am capable off in the editor. - Release "Starbow beta" on January 21 on all servers. - Hopefully will a larger player pool find this enjoyable. (And the game does not die after 2 weeks.. ) - Release a few patches during maybe 1-3 months, based on the playtesting & feedback from a larger player pool. What spells + units needs to be improved, reworked or removed? What brutal bugs have been found? Any flaws in the gameplay or meta game? Perhaps will a couple of new persons join us to help me out with the editor work? No matter how much work we put into Starbow now, both in design and balance, the true test will come when more people start to play it. And they will do things to the game none of us have thought of. More patches will need to be released, after the game is "completed." Hopefully will balance changes be enough, but probably will some design changes be needed too. So my goal before January 21 is to make the game playable. Not perfect. But no unit or spell shall feel incompleted or poor. Sum it up: - Release a decent version of Starbow at January 21. (Every unit + spell shall feel ok at least) - Hopefully get more feedback from a larger player pool. - Release few patches during the spring to fix both design and balance flaws. (Or improve stuff that feels lame.) - Those patches will maybe not be made by me, and the game might be "passed on" to someone else or a team. (Depending on my time) @Detail stuff left to fix? + Show Spoiler + @Protoss air + Show Spoiler + The SC2 Carrier is unmicroable. It is as "fun" as microing a Tempest. So for the sake of simplicity, I might aswell keep the Carrier. (Unless someone has a fun micro solution to the Tempest.) Maybe will someone in the future find a way to improve Carrier micro in the editor. To compensate, perhaps can Fleet Beacon become a bit cheaper. (Also encourages more Sentinel play due to its spell upgrade) There is some debate regarding how the abilities shall be arranged on Corsair, Scout and Sentinel. Please continue to bring suggestions, otherwise I might let it remain as it is, since I think it is decent enough now. (Or go for Hiders suggestion) @Nerve Jammer + Show Spoiler + I am mostly concerned that this spell leads to lame gameplay vs mech. As soon as Z or P tries to engage Terran mech positions, throw down Nerve Jammers to prevent their attack. Which kinda makes players fear to attack at all? Maybe PDD or something else can be added instead. Solid has suggested a spell that unsieges Tanks and unburrows Lurkers in an area. I think it is too narrow. Maybe if it silences units? Units in that area are unburrowed/unsieged and can not use spells or abilities? The area lasts 15 seconds like Nerve Jammer..... Hmm @Ghost + Show Spoiler + I would prefer if it is actually useful in a fun way! >.< I know Hunter seeker missile has been suggested. But T can already deal direct damage via Reaper mines, Yamato gun, Irradiate and Nuke. It would be nice if there was a spell with more finess. Something that fits a stealthy infilitrator type-of-unit. @Robo unit + Show Spoiler + I can´t stand the Colossus. It haunts me in my dreams. It is a Dragoon with different stats who can walk up and down cliffs. It is lame to control. I know many ideas have been sent in about it and its attack. They feel bad when I build them, probably because I am not skilled enough in the editor >,< I think the Stalker feels different enough compared to the Dragoon, and it is really fun to control it. (And it is useful) The Sentinel fits Protoss too and feels unique and fun to control. Three options: - Someone just gives me a super good solution for the Colossus - Someone sends me a great design solution for the Phalanx. Either as a caster or combat unit. (The model and its animations are already complete, so it is easy to fix this unit in the editor.) - I add no new Robo unit before January 21. Instead it gets added later or never. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EZ9ciD8.jpg) BUT WHY DO YOU WANT A NEW ROBO UNIT, KABEL?!! - Something that can fight/deal with Bio and Roach/Hydra in the midgame, WITHOUT forcing P to rush for lategame AoE, like Reaver or Storm. (Bio + Roach/Hydra slaughter Gateway stuff) - Allows us to modify Reavers splash damage, which actually makes Bio playable. (And gives more room for PvP meta game instead of Reaver vs Reaver 4-everr!!) - New shiny things are fun to play with (until people discover they are not made of gold!) @Other stuff mentioned here in the thread + Show Spoiler + Stalker might need slightly better damage yes. (Either +dmg or faster attack speed) I will not remove smart cast. Just as I won´t remove unlimited selection, worker rally to auto-mine minerals, or other interface stuff. (If I could.) It will only generate frustration from all players who are used to SC2. (Which is our "target group.") Instead the spells need to be adapted to the interface. I think that is the easier route to take. @Summary of my appeals to ya all: + Show Spoiler + - Solution for Protoss air units? (I know you have sent me one Hider) - Solution for Ghost? - Solution for Vessel starting spell? - Solution for Robo unit? I am especially curious at reading design solutions for the Phalanx, even if the unit is added or not. (I know you have written about it already Zaphod) Ps. I will reply to all PMs tomorrow morning. (I have not been able to write here for almost a week) Ps2. I am not home atm, but I will hopefully be able to upload the new maps on saturday. (Hopefully) So please send the files to me! Ps3. God jul! | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
Sounds like a good plan! Can't wait for the "Starbow is finally complete" thread at SC2-general and battle.net (and reddit/r/starcraft and....??) | ||
|
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Denmark697 Posts
1. Agile AOE unit with mediocre range (5-6) 2. Slow AOE unit with good range (6-7) and heavy attacks. 3. Agile sniper unit with good range (6-7) 4. Slow Sniper unit with great range (7-8) In my opinion it should definately also be fragile and have less than great mobility (it can have some movement ability to reposition or flee). It should be fragile to make it a clear target for enemy troops, and allow more power to its attacks. It should avoid high cross map mobility to make it less of a deathball unit. (I use the term agility for how it moves in combat) | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9433 Posts
On December 24 2013 08:19 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: I think you misunderstood my post. I was not arguing that the Colossus should go because of its use vs mech (it's bad vs mech). I was arguing that there is no need for Immortals - especially with hardened shields. My point for the Colossus is the same as it has always been - it is horribly designed, and can't be made to fit because of mechanics such as cliffwalk and air vulnerability. It simply has too many strong mechanics combined with a huge incentive for hard counters. this means that no version of the Colossus can ever be made usable without completely dominating ground troops. The problem is most obvious when you compare it to Tanks: The enemy builds Colossi? Get anti air. The enemy builds tanks? Flank him/Drop his lines/catch him unsieged ect. The decision against Colossi are purely strategic and based on composition. Its one dimensional design. I know there are finesse to be applied, but the bulk of it is on the strategic side of playing. Cliff walk? That's not really a particularly significant advantage in anyway. At least in Sc2 the advantage is rarely noticed. Rather, I believe its a small interesting tweak that differs it somewhat from the Dragoon. Further, it also makes it slightly better at dealing with drop play which is a good thing due to the implemtnation of siege-pick up in dropships. Air vulnerability perhaps - But there is just no reason to get so focussed on specific attributes of the Sc2-version. Stuff like that can be fixed and name can be changed. No reason to debate over this for the time being. Rather, the question is whether the Plalanx is a better model to use or not? Dirty argued that he didn't like the Collosus in Sbow due to lack of agility. So the question is whether we can make the Collosus more agile or whether the Phalanx is a better model in that regard? However, with the Plalanx new problems will arise such as; - Can I pull this unit back when it is being target fired in mid/large sized battles? - Does this unit stand out from Dragoons in battles (as The collosus does which makes target firing an opportunity). - Ghost and its starting spell - Vessel starting spell - Robo unit - Protoss air Seems like a good list. Though I probably would just keep Never Jammer till release and focus on balancing it properly instead. In my opinion its cost could be reduced to 75 energy. Then post-release, we can test stuff like new Plague, replacement for Nerve Jammer etc. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
The SC2 Carrier is unmicroable. It is as "fun" as microing a Tempest The tempest would be funnier to micro here. The carrier cant even targetfire properly. Maybe PDD or something else can be added instead It sounds problematic adding PDD. Its better than irradiate in combat against zerg, it stops alot of dragoonhits while used in tvp etc Solid has suggested a spell that unsieges Tanks and unburrows Lurkers in an area. I think it is too narrow. Maybe if it silences units? I kinda like this idea of solid. Its very simple, only affects one unit. And the opponent can react fast and siege up or burrow. It feels 'strategic'. Deponds where you put it tho, i would not rly like it on the SV, more on the ghost. The point is, adding a silence effect just like the nerve jammer feels 'unfun'(?) Opponent cant do anything against that other than move to another place which is huge most likely And in direct combat, just use it where there are most enemy units in an area | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9433 Posts
It sounds problematic adding PDD. Its better than irradiate in combat against zerg, it stops alot of dragoonhits while used in tvp etc PDD is also more boring than Nerve Jammer IMO (which I guess says a lot). In the end, I don't think its worth spending time on coming up with a new replacement for NJ. Abilities that don't deal damage are just super hard to make interesting., Nerve Jammer (from a design-perspective) is pretty decent of a non-damage ability. I think our time is much better spent on coming up with an AOE-based damage ability - that rewards remicro - for the Ghost instead. Nerve Jammer can then instead get a small energy reduction to 75 which should create approximate balance. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
I think our time is much better spent on coming up with an AOE-based damage ability - that rewards remicro - for the Ghost instead. Nerve Jammer can then instead get a small energy reduction to 75 which should create approximate balance. It would be very fun if the ghost got into a good position - however, aoe on ghost seems problematic. Dont u think? Not sure what kind of aoe to add here for him. Singletarget spells seems much easier to make, and to create gameplaymicro for the opponent. If u have something in mind i would love to hear it tho What would you feel about this - remove marauder, get ghost in his position: Make the ghost a combat unit, like the marauder(faster movementspeed, maybe even add stim(like u suggested). Good auto-attack). And at the same time, make him a "mini spellcaster". Like 1-2 relevant spells. Well here is solids suggestion decent atleast, undeploys siegetanks. Unburrows lurkers. To me, its a very simple spell which the opponent can react fast against. I kinda like it, what u think? The other spell i thought about was just simple this: his cloak, if it silence enemy spellcasters close to him. Could have a slower movement speed in cloak for example, tweak it. With this in mind is the hightemplar. Could see some antimicro from protoss here. 'Antimicro', i dont know the correct word... Also against the defiler, maybe. The relevant part is the ht. | ||
|
( bush
321 Posts
| ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
On December 28 2013 08:49 Foxxan wrote: It would be very fun if the ghost got into a good position - however, aoe on ghost seems problematic. Dont u think? Not sure what kind of aoe to add here for him. Singletarget spells seems much easier to make, and to create gameplaymicro for the opponent. If u have something in mind i would love to hear it tho What would you feel about this - remove marauder, get ghost in his position: Make the ghost a combat unit, like the marauder(faster movementspeed, maybe even add stim(like u suggested). Good auto-attack). And at the same time, make him a "mini spellcaster". Like 1-2 relevant spells. Well here is solids suggestion decent atleast, undeploys siegetanks. Unburrows lurkers. To me, its a very simple spell which the opponent can react fast against. I kinda like it, what u think? The other spell i thought about was just simple this: his cloak, if it silence enemy spellcasters close to him. Could have a slower movement speed in cloak for example, tweak it. With this in mind is the hightemplar. Could see some antimicro from protoss here. 'Antimicro', i dont know the correct word... Also against the defiler, maybe. The relevant part is the ht. @Ghost. I'm kinda digging this. One of the mauraders supposed roles is to give Terrans an alternative to mech in TvT. If the ghost becomes better at strait up fighting it does not need spells that has to be super general. This makes the unsiege / unburrow spell more viable if the unit itself is not a primary spellcaster (unlike units like the HT). This also makes the unit a natural replacement for maurader (which are also suppose to deal with lurkers as an alternative to tanks). Ghost would the the more fragile, but more mobile "siege tank" with less dmg ofc, but lower tech for interesting metagame. The cloak, like you said, would still fit nicely, maybe even better now. | ||
|
SolidSMD
Belgium408 Posts
I would rather keep his dps low and make him more focused on little control abilities like the unsiege spell. Ghost should mainly be a supporting character. | ||
| ||
