EPTAnd more videos plz i dont have SC2 at this town but i would like to whatch Starbow every day.. Plz more vids or some stream ?
[A] Starbow - Page 87
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
bole
Serbia164 Posts
And more videos plz i dont have SC2 at this town but i would like to whatch Starbow every day.. Plz more vids or some stream ? | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Goliath dies vs corsair. Their a good unit, but you need 3 corsairs to stop stimmed marines from shooting and then another to kill the units. Missile turrets are a better solution, but you need even longer to set those up. Gols do alright vs immortal, but nowhere near as good as stimmed marines. Immortals take down gols extremely quickly as you might expect. I'm thinking well placed EMPs will really turn the tide, same for storms from Toss. Immortals without shields are not going to break a mech line any time soon. I cast when I have awesome games to cast  . Obviously we need more NA players, and anyone feel free to send me a replay if you think its a pretty fun game after watching the replay yourself. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
Assuming the creep speed bonus is still 30%, at 2.6 base speed you'll get Hydralisks with 3.38 speed on creep, same value as SC2. We want to keep that the Hydras speed ceiling while still making them significantly faster off creep than your standard infantry speed, but ideally we don't want to nerf their creep bonus and cause an ugly inconsistency. So here's my solution: Start Hydras at a base speed of 2. Very slow, but decent on creep (2.6). Put the speed upgrade back in Hatchery tech, have it increase base speed by 30%. This makes their off creep speed now the same as it was on creep, 2.6, and the on creep speed goes up to 3.38. Then introduce ANOTHER upgrade at Hive tech. This will allow Hydralisks to temporarily generate their own creep for 12 seconds. It will let them have use of a temporary speed boost when necessary on open ground, either to attack or retreat. However it won't stack with regular creep, so their speed ceiling remains topped at 3.38 regardless. | ||
|
Danko__
Poland429 Posts
Imho 2(+0,4 on creep 20%), 3(+0,6) with upgrade. 2,6 speed till hatch to hive will kill this unit completly. Im curious how zvp/zvt looks on NA. Can you stream/cast some of these? | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Arkuss is convinced you can hold it. Matchpoint is so easy to hit from different angles spines are bad. Zerg won matches with silly things that required his opponent to mess up bad like not walling off or lurker drops early. We'll see what Arkuss can use, but as of right now, its way easier for a lower skill player to win PvZ. I blame hydras being absolutely terrible. I think we're up to 5 or 6 macro hatches to produce enough larva to fight off a 2 base all in. | ||
|
bole
Serbia164 Posts
On September 23 2012 01:38 decemberscalm wrote: Vultures do bonus damage vs only light units like they always have, so they are terrible at taking down mechanical units. You generally want them to take out the zealots before they start ripping into tank guts. Spider mines easily do enough damage to activate hardened shield. Goliath dies vs corsair. Their a good unit, but you need 3 corsairs to stop stimmed marines from shooting and then another to kill the units. Missile turrets are a better solution, but you need even longer to set those up. Gols do alright vs immortal, but nowhere near as good as stimmed marines. Immortals take down gols extremely quickly as you might expect. I'm thinking well placed EMPs will really turn the tide, same for storms from Toss. Immortals without shields are not going to break a mech line any time soon. I cast when I have awesome games to cast . Obviously we need more NA players, and anyone feel free to send me a replay if you think its a pretty fun game after watching the replay yourself.I agree with you M8 but i dont think the spells need to be solution to fix gameplay i thik that is also mestace of SC2 FUNGEL OR FORCE FEALDS.. Its bad for gameplay... simply in this game you have BW terran vs SC2 more or less Toss ... and you can see corsair(phonex) and immortals wery good vs mech... and terran need to svitch and use bio vs that... i dont like that.. its hard to pull off.. i think Terrans need to have solution in Mech army Unit that will conter immortal or corsair.. i think maby Vultures or Goliaths needs some caind of special atc to break down shilds of imortall or toss unites to conter them.. or some new terran unite to conter this SC2 composition of toss unites ... Simply spells are bed solutions for fixing gameplay...they usualy brak it if ( units dont have proper counter) or be great if (units have proper conter) and bring more interesting gameplay...to table... | ||
|
Canhanrah
35 Posts
On September 23 2012 02:02 SmileZerg wrote: I ran some numbers on Hydralisks and here's what I got. Assuming the creep speed bonus is still 30%, at 2.6 base speed you'll get Hydralisks with 3.38 speed on creep, same value as SC2. We want to keep that the Hydras speed ceiling while still making them significantly faster off creep than your standard infantry speed, but ideally we don't want to nerf their creep bonus and cause an ugly inconsistency. So here's my solution: Start Hydras at a base speed of 2. Very slow, but decent on creep (2.6). Put the speed upgrade back in Hatchery tech, have it increase base speed by 30%. This makes their off creep speed now the same as it was on creep, 2.6, and the on creep speed goes up to 3.38. Then introduce ANOTHER upgrade at Hive tech. This will allow Hydralisks to temporarily generate their own creep for 12 seconds. It will let them have use of a temporary speed boost when necessary on open ground, either to attack or retreat. However it won't stack with regular creep, so their speed ceiling remains topped at 3.38 regardless. Interesting hive upgrade thought... I'm not so sure about speed being on hatch tech though... could make some sort of bust easier with the reinforce speed. Also it feels like it could let z stay on hatch tech a bit longer O.o | ||
|
Iatrik
Germany159 Posts
How are you supposed to hold a baneling bust as protoss? I'm just not able to defend an allin like that. | ||
|
nilsheam
United States28 Posts
| ||
|
ArkussSC2
Canada95 Posts
As for the protoss 2 base or 1 base all in vs Z. It is holdable and is definitely map specific. On Match Point theres too many angles to hold so spining up will only work half decent but the fear of being 1-2 base all-in'd stops the fast third expansion. A base 2 zerg will hold a 1 base protoss no problem just as a Zerg can hold a 4gate with ease. Once you spot that the protoss player is doing a 1 base play not a 2base play your immediate response as zerg is to throw down 4 spines at your natural. 4 spines with speedlings will hold off any sort of 2base gate timing. When it comes to corsairs and immortals it gets tricky and you'll want some lurkers, mutas or a third base with a similar idea. Again though the key isn't to sit there and pray you don't die. Without FF's you can easily do zergling runbys slowing down the timing attacks and with zerglings on the map you can see the timing attack coming and flank it from the ass after it engages the spines. The biggest problem on NA is we're lacking the master tier players and a lot of people just sit and die to attacks and call them OP/broken. If your strategy is to sit on your hands and watch then yes you do but being a proactive player will keep you alive. As for the hydralisk. I don't care what anyone thinks, the unit is far too weak early game to matchup to anything. It melts to protoss without dishing damage, it melts to terran bio and it melts to mutas of all things (should be a hard counter...). My suggestion to fix it would be to get rid of the idea of hydras doing a buff vs armoured and just give it some more raw power. Zerg doesn't need a "bonus vs armour" unit, we've never had one and look at SC2 Zerg is raping. I understand people don't like the unit "Roach" but we need a suitable replacement for it and the hydra just isn't it unless it's fixed. As for movement speed I think its movement is fine personally and the speed buff makes it the same unit as BW but god damn this unit is useless until 3/3 and by that point you're dead. I've played over 50+ games, most of my matchs PvZ and all the zergs know never to Hydralisk or to becareful with numbers because they just melt. Love the MOD and wish more players who actually play would leave their comments. Observers comments are great but obing a game doesn't fully show you the balance as well as playing against something. On NA we have a great community doing lots of KOTH type matchs and analyzing the games after theyre done. We really need some diamond/masters terrans on NA though please. December can't be the guy who has to play the less popular races all the time  | ||
|
Iatrik
Germany159 Posts
On September 23 2012 10:27 ArkussSC2 wrote: You can hold off a baneling bust as protoss no problem. What sort of baneling bust are you suggesting? A base ling/bling hit at around 6-7 minutes or a 1 base bust at 4:30-5? With an FFE you can scout it and make a hard wall, then it's just too many banelings required to be efficient and chrono the cannon and if the lings do get in you have some zealots. Best solution is obviously be aggressive yourself and it all comes down to micro management, scouting and proper response As for the protoss 2 base or 1 base all in vs Z. It is holdable and is definitely map specific. On Match Point theres too many angles to hold so spining up will only work half decent but the fear of being 1-2 base all-in'd stops the fast third expansion. A base 2 zerg will hold a 1 base protoss no problem just as a Zerg can hold a 4gate with ease. Once you spot that the protoss player is doing a 1 base play not a 2base play your immediate response as zerg is to throw down 4 spines at your natural. 4 spines with speedlings will hold off any sort of 2base gate timing. When it comes to corsairs and immortals it gets tricky and you'll want some lurkers, mutas or a third base with a similar idea. Again though the key isn't to sit there and pray you don't die. Without FF's you can easily do zergling runbys slowing down the timing attacks and with zerglings on the map you can see the timing attack coming and flank it from the ass after it engages the spines. The biggest problem on NA is we're lacking the master tier players and a lot of people just sit and die to attacks and call them OP/broken. If your strategy is to sit on your hands and watch then yes you do but being a proactive player will keep you alive. As for the hydralisk. I don't care what anyone thinks, the unit is far too weak early game to matchup to anything. It melts to protoss without dishing damage, it melts to terran bio and it melts to mutas of all things (should be a hard counter...). My suggestion to fix it would be to get rid of the idea of hydras doing a buff vs armoured and just give it some more raw power. Zerg doesn't need a "bonus vs armour" unit, we've never had one and look at SC2 Zerg is raping. I understand people don't like the unit "Roach" but we need a suitable replacement for it and the hydra just isn't it unless it's fixed. As for movement speed I think its movement is fine personally and the speed buff makes it the same unit as BW but god damn this unit is useless until 3/3 and by that point you're dead. I've played over 50+ games, most of my matchs PvZ and all the zergs know never to Hydralisk or to becareful with numbers because they just melt. Love the MOD and wish more players who actually play would leave their comments. Observers comments are great but obing a game doesn't fully show you the balance as well as playing against something. On NA we have a great community doing lots of KOTH type matchs and analyzing the games after theyre done. We really need some diamond/masters terrans on NA though please. December can't be the guy who has to play the less popular races all the time Sadly , i don`t know, if there is a EU scene  I tried to get in contact with some players via the chatchannel "starbow" , but it was just empty T-T | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
On September 23 2012 10:33 Iatrik wrote: Considering its 4 AM in Sweden at the time I'm posting this, I'm not surprised Sadly , i don`t know, if there is a EU scene I tried to get in contact with some players via the chatchannel "starbow" , but it was just empty T-T .As far as I can tell most EU is Swedish? | ||
|
ArkussSC2
Canada95 Posts
| ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
-income feels slow. -gas income is disproportionately smaller than mineral income. -bases mine out fast. -graviton beam is too spammable and available too early. imo make it a 75 energy spell and corsairs start at 50. Corsair should be a strong anti air first and foremost. -hydras, idk they seem just as strong as bw hydras. Hydras were never good vs zealots in similar numbers or against marines and mutas. The low gas income hurts the hydra/lurker combo vs toss as well. -Lings feel very weak due to the AI. Both because clumped lings will take more splash damage and because the clumped enemy units can deal a ton of damage and give very little surface area for the lings to attack. This is just my opinion after a few games btw Some work to do but overall a very enjoyable mod! | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
I think there are simpler methods to make hydras useful than to add another kind of seperate speed upgrade. @ pylon power regenerates shield Interesting thought. There has been some discussion whether some kind of shield battery should be introduced. I will leave it as a possibility but not add anything to the game yet. We have enough stuff to get to work already. (Its also been discussed if creep should give some kind of armor or life regeneration bonus to Zerg, to further make creep spread and overlord drop creep even more important) @ EU-scene Even Starbow players sleep ^^ From what I´ve heard, the EU scene is bigger than the NA scene. If you join the Starbow chat channel around the evening Im sure you will find an opponent. Sometimes there can be up to 15 people in the channel. Sometimes only 3. But there is a constant player base of ca 10 players from different countries who plays this regulary. (What I know atleast) @ income pace L3gendary, you bring up a good point. I´m feeling a similar thing. The game accelerates and develops at a rather slow rate. I am not saying that everything must happen now now and now! But one of the bad things with BW was the slow start up. Once I finished a game I had to consider if it was worth to start another just because of the first 5 "dead" minutes. (Often it was worth it ^^ ) That is one of the advantages with SC2, that the game kinda quickly starts. Both in terms of combat action, tech choices and expansions. The economy is the most important thing in the game since it determines so much. I will double check all values, to see if the ratio between gas & minerals, saturation time and other stuff are correct. I look at the BW and SC2 economies for comparision. | ||
|
ArkussSC2
Canada95 Posts
@EDIT: Nevermind, the more I play the more I notice the economy starts off fast then slows right down. Maybe add more mineral patches to each base for better saturation? Corsair gravitational thingy is fine imo having used it and having it against me. With phoenix they get full energy and you fly over a mineral patch and gg all drones dead in literally 10 seconds. With corsair you can't do that because of the cooldown, if you fly 5 corsairs in you kill 5 drones and then you have to retreat. When it comes to engagements you have to pick what you want to pull very caraefully. I've been experimenting with corsair in PvT and find lifting the tank line is a great strategy but you gotta make sure your pulls are worth it or you lose ground and the engagement. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Right now all expansions only have 6 mineral patches. This means that expansions are saturated fast, but the income per base is currently very low. You can´t do much off of two bases and you reach that limit really fast. This means that we get a really long mid-game and a slow feeling of development. Its like the spark is missing. Its when players get 3 and 4 bases they get enough income to really do stuff, and the 3 and 4 bases are usually up around 12-15 minutes into the game. Compare that to SC2 where Zerg has the greater spire on its way while on only 3 bases. (Ive been watching the Dreamhack stream to get some input from Sc2) The initial thought in Starbow is not bad: Each base uses fewer workers and generates a bit less income, hence players can have more bases. I just don´t think we have nailed it yet. This just needs to be smoothened and I am calculating and experimenting in the editor. I have two suggestions: - If mineral patches per base is increased from 6 to 8 we get more room for a better saturation time and a bit higher income per base. Still 3 bases won´t be enough to reach 200/200 easily, but the extra mineral patches will give more room for players to actually build stuff. - Workers have a longer build time in Starbow compared to SC2, since fewer are needed per base. Otherwise a base goes from 0 to 100% efficency really fast. The bad thing is that Starbow falls behind compared to SC2 in economic acceleration, as I mentioned above. One way to solve this is to increase the starting workers to 7 or 8, instead of 6. Starbow will accelerate faster into the game due to the extra early income. (Ive tried it and it feels much better) I have uploaded this as an experiment on EU now but there is no one online to try it with. Anyone wanna get online and give it a try? Why do I not use the BW economy exactly as it is? + Show Spoiler + The income from a base in BW is almost similar to the income in SC2 and you need 24 workers in each. Look at streams or vods. Protoss and Terran often stays at 2 or 3 bases, macros up a big army, pushes out and then expands a fourth time since his main is almost depleted. We don´t see this grabbing or denying bases back and forth in the first 15 minutes of the game (except for BW Zerg), which we have started to see in Starbow. I did use the BW values a long time in the MOD but I felt it did not change anything in the gameplay. It was still played similar to SC2, just not as extreme. Thats why I base the Starbow economy on the BW and SC2 economies, but I try to tweak it just a bit. Lower the income a bit per expansion and make more than 16 workers uncessary. If I am completely wrong at this one, enlighten me! Why do workers have such a long build time in Starbow? + Show Spoiler + Workers in SC2 and BW are built at 17 seconds. You need 24 on minerals at each base to be fully saturated. 24x17=408 second. In Starbow, 8 mineral patches need 16 workers. 408/16 = 25 seconds BT. In this way, the time it takes to fully saturate a base is similar in all economies. What are you so concerned about this? Just let it be ffs! + Show Spoiler + As many of you say, the MOD is playable. Its quite fun sometimes. But it does not feel perfect. The economy is such an area.. Its ok right now but it can be better.. | ||
|
Zain3
Sweden45 Posts
since they removed the Warhound with haywire(designed to deal with immortal heavy toss) why not bring another siege unit ? is it too big for the game itself? it should still be countered by the templars faceback (whatever its called, cant remember right now) or does the tanks counter protoss mech in a very viable way? | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
| ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
Why does income feel slow? A few reasons. 1. 7 min/gas per trip instead of 8 2. Can't go past 2 workers per patch. In bw you could have over 30 workers at a base and still get extra returns although greatly diminishing. 3. Patches feel like they mine out quickly for whatever reason. 4. Gas income is probably slow because you went from 6 gas workers/~20 min workers or 6/24 workers to 3/12 or 3/18 depending on which base ur mining from. Its only equal at max saturation at expos otherwise u get relatively more mineral income. 5. Easier macro compared to bw makes the game feel slower. sc2 feels better because u still need to keep up with macroing all the income. | ||
| ||
