EPTOn May 12 2013 19:12 Zain3 wrote:
uhm just gotta ask..
does banelings do friendly dmg?
uhm just gotta ask..
does banelings do friendly dmg?
Uhm... no? Banelings are exactly the same as they are in WoL and HotS.
OneGoal: A better SC2 [Project Hub] - Page 59
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
topsecret221
United States108 Posts
Uhm... no? Banelings are exactly the same as they are in WoL and HotS. | ||
|
RedGD
Germany22 Posts
For example the Baneling gets an ability to jump to an air unit in a range of 2 or 3. This ability could be an upgrade on tier 2. So you have Baneling and Terror in one unit. That sounds interesting, right? Try it and or evolve this idea please. ^^ One reason why Blizzard set Hydras to tier 2 is to have some distinctions between SC 1 and SC 2. That Roach is T 1 and Hydras are T 2 is not bad. The problem is the anti air possibilities against mutas and further changes that Blizzard has made. You could play mass Hydras, if Hydras need 1 supply instead of 2. Small additional changes can make it great. You could play mass hydras on T 2. Your solutions seem to me often too radical. Some radical changes are good, but not so many. Great job! Thanks! | ||
|
topsecret221
United States108 Posts
My big question, as a Z player, is why so many zergs want the Tier 1.5 roach so badly, aside from either familiarity, or survivability (and the latter doesn't feel right on a core zerg unit). There are a number of dynamics that are altered by the T1.5 hydralisk and the T2 roach, and most of these dynamics feel more appropriate than the opposite. I genuinely would like to hear some discussion on why the roach is thematically a better than the hydralisk at T1.5. | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
| ||
|
Spaceboy
United Kingdom220 Posts
On May 13 2013 02:45 topsecret221 wrote: ~snip~ My big question, as a Z player, is why so many zergs want the Tier 1.5 roach so badly, aside from either familiarity, or survivability (and the latter doesn't feel right on a core zerg unit). There are a number of dynamics that are altered by the T1.5 hydralisk and the T2 roach, and most of these dynamics feel more appropriate than the opposite. I genuinely would like to hear some discussion on why the roach is thematically a better than the hydralisk at T1.5. I cannot understand this either. For me the 1 supply 1.5 tier hydra is the single best thing about this mod. It's massively refreshing as zerg to have a massable, microable, all purpose unit that you can use as the backbone to any army. Put together with the way it's so insanely synergistic with creep spread now (due to having a full movement speed buff on it when hydra speed is researched), which I find deeply satisfying and awesome.. I just don't get the complaints at all. Also, though I think talking about balance at this stage of development is pretty moronic, if I had to err one side or another I'd say they're closer to being OP than UP. | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
1. Does this feedback fit into the overall design criteria? i. Is this in theme for the experience of the viewer and player? ii. Is this something that is easy to understand and provides varied gameplay? iii. Does this produce good in-game dynamics (unit interactions, timings, ect.) and counterplay? iiii. Does this unit scale with skill. A starcraft unit has to do that in spades or its bad. This is why the WOL Mothership was bad. It stood on Vortex a binary, skill less ability with limited counterplay potential. The Wesp and Infiltrator fail on different grounds. If you want I can break down why they don't work in an esport like SC2. 2. How well does the player understand the game and the community? I will take people like TB and iNcontrol more seriously than a guy who is saying that this is a bad mod because they found something with numbers that weren't high enough. 3. Is that person giving feedback in a mature and clear manner? This is something that TonBB needs to work on. You don't belittle someone when they make a mistake or do something you don't like if you are trying to be constructive. If you want a mature dialogue, you have to act like an adult. It's called respect. I respect TonBB enough to listen to him/her and take into account his/her feedback. That feedback was important in our review of the Infestor and Roach. He/she wasn't the only one who said the Roach needed work either, pointing to a possible problem. Finally on the Hydra, no one said you couldn't build 5 queens for AA. Hell, you can rush to Lair and get super roaches. Or you can have a tier 1.5 super marine that is perma-stimmed. We buffed them last patch because they didn't do enough damage. If you don't like how they die to splash, either learn how to split them like Terrans have split their marines for years (we changed the hydra specifically so they can do that,) or you can build different units that are more to your playstyle. The Hydra scales with skill better than the HotS Roach and is better able to match the theme of the race. The feedback we regularly recieve from Z players from Bronze to Masters is overwhelmingly positive. If you want to talk to these players, you are welcome to attend our weekly field testing events. We have yet to see you. That said, if you REALLY want 2 Supply Tier 2 Hydras, there is HotS, it is a great game and has a fantastic ladder system., and a much higher player base than OG or Starbow.  | ||
|
StandAloneComplex
65 Posts
So im naturally attracted to mods like yours, sorry for that.You also can't scare me away. Im very zen like. As long as i think there is still hope zergwise for this mod, i will post on this teamliquid forum, because that's what tl forums are good for . Even if i where not here, than there would be others, who don't like your vision of zerg, to fill my gap.Thats just how the internet works.As i said im not the only zerg who favors roaches over hydras and we are not an minority neither. Im sure you can find an pro who shares your vision of an zerg ecosystem. Im also sure you can find an pro who don't shares your vision of an zerg ecosystem. That's not the point. Professional players are people with a better understanding of the game and higher reflexes, but that doesn't mean that they have all the same opinion as Lalush has.No offence against Lalush. Im kind of busy in the moment, but somewhere in the next week i will answer your questions regarding my feedback more in depth and accurate. I have criticized your hydra T1 vision so you have the right to get more in depth answers to your questions but i just can't do it right now. Don't be mad about my posts. Im just a zerg fan who likes to make the zerg race even more interesting gameplaywise. Criticism is just a byproduct, not my main topic. P.S : I can't answer you any questions regarding TonBB , i can only speak for my self. I am very mannered , don't y think. | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
| ||
|
FreeTossCZComentary
Czech Republic143 Posts
On May 13 2013 03:57 ItWhoSpeaks wrote: @Standalone. What league are you guys in? Because Lalush is/was a GM Zerg player and we have worked with him closely in the past when it came to designing Zerg, if you want, you can PM him about it... Honestly, I think Lalush knows far more about Zerg, and the game in general than either of you, or our team. This is not right way to argument. Just because someone important says something, its right. Albert Einstein was against thing implied by quantum mechanics, and his name is way bigger than Niels Bohr or other people. And, please, throw away this "we know it all" or "league is everything" cause you don't and it is not. And this "allmighty" feel you are trying to put on, pi**es even someone like me on, while I am passing around. Just concentrate on facts, and leave this emotionality to yourself, or you will end up like idra... Examples of your allmighty feel you try to emit or manipulative attacks(as you asked for them in next post): 1) "Marine: Why would any sane person want to change this unit?"(Manipulative trick known as 'poisoned well'. If there was some person who wanted to give you idea of how to change marine, he would look like 'not sane'.) 2) "What league are you guys in?" League card as I said. You might use Lalush. But using league card calls for yellow card for you. 3) "I will take people like TB and iNcontrol more seriously than a guy who is saying that this is a bad mod because they found something with numbers that weren't high enough." Do so when trying to make something balanced after design was solved. Till you are not completely done with "design changes", there is no difference between iNControl and bronze league Joe. 4) "...there is HotS, it is a great game and has a fantastic ladder system., and a much higher player base than OG or Starbow." Basicaly polite way to send him somewhere not so polite... You could have said that way more friendly. -> and if your argument is that you have right to be... angered by him... yes, you have, and so does iDra. But both of you have to take in account what does it mean - that you are gonna lose popularity. | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
| ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
On May 13 2013 06:36 FreeTossCZComentary wrote: Examples of your allmighty feel you try to emit or manipulative attacks(as you asked for them in next post): 1) "Marine: Why would any sane person want to change this unit?"(Manipulative trick known as 'poisoned well'. If there was some person who wanted to give you idea of how to change marine, he would look like 'not sane'.) 2) "What league are you guys in?" League card as I said. You might use Lalush. But using league card calls for yellow card for you. 3) "I will take people like TB and iNcontrol more seriously than a guy who is saying that this is a bad mod because they found something with numbers that weren't high enough." Do so when trying to make something balanced after design was solved. Till you are not completely done with "design changes", there is no difference between iNControl and bronze league Joe. 4) "...there is HotS, it is a great game and has a fantastic ladder system., and a much higher player base than OG or Starbow." Basicaly polite way to send him somewhere not so polite... You could have said that way more friendly. -> and if your argument is that you have right to be... angered by him... yes, you have, and so does iDra. But both of you have to take in account what does it mean - that you are gonna lose popularity. Ok, first off, why would I be manipulative for a community project with a playerbase of 40is people? That sounds petty and ineffective? I am irked because respect is not being reciprocated by a particular community member on repeated occasions. It's clear that I have overstepped in some areas, and that is unfortunate and unwarrented; my bad  That said, If you want to do a witch hunt; there are probably more important people to go after. If you are going to attempt to shame me or something to that effect; don't bother wasting your time. I am going to answer each point you brought up because I think they are important. 1. This isn't a logical fallacy, this is simply citing a well designed unit. The Marine is widely held to be a well designed unit and hasn't changed fundamentally in 15 years. There are reasons for it. I am not trying to win an argument here, just trying to show that it is silly to try and change something that does so much good and is so well put together. 2. Yup, that came out totally wrong and has a bad connotation, if I could take it back,; I would. That said, when it comes to understanding things like timings or other very precise, context specific things (like how things will interact on different maps) You had better believe that player skill and experience matter. They take priority over theory, in these cases because it is harder to predict dynamics without seeing it done by people with good mechanics and timing sense. It would have been much more constructive. 3. This is incorrect. A Bronze League Joe may or may not know anything about design or the game. InControl and TB know the game from a spectator perspective inside and out because they have literally thousands of hours of experience over the average Bronze Leaguer. That said, there is feedback a casual or low skill player can give that TB and pro players often cant: Player Experience. Player experience encompass how accessible the experience is to them. 4. Yup, I could have been nicer about this. My patience is not what it used to be, especially this week. It is an easy facility to think you know best; goodness knows that I make that mistake all the time. Here is the deal though. I have put in somewhere around 2,000 manhours into this mod, on top of a 40 hour a week job and moving two states over. I have learned a lot in the last six months through trial and error, and learning from people who are more experienced than I am. This is the result of 9 peoples concentrated efforts over 6 months. Something they did in addition to their school and work. Unless criticism is polite and constructive and takes that effort into account, it short changes the effort my team has made. That is not fair to the mod, the people who put real time and thought into it, and the dialogues that are intended to improve it, and by extension, the game/community. I will not coddle those people. If they take issue with that, cool, there are plenty of places in the community where they can go and contribute and have fun without demeaning the work of my team. Additionally, I think it is a bit much to compare me to Idra. I have yet to wish cancer on someone over a game or game design. I have called people rude, there is a big difference. That seems like a logical fallacy of some sort. TL;DR. Yup, I have been too abrasive. Apologies. You are over-simplifying things and people need to be more respectful when it comes to feedback. | ||
|
Project:WayOfFreedom
Czech Republic11 Posts
Also I am sorry for being so... well... I dont know polite word to say about what I have done there - but I really felt like I had to, in order to make sure, you still intend to stay community project. GL in your way of doing it... With deep apologies for being quite inpolite, FreeToss | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9341 Posts
On May 13 2013 17:16 Project:WayOfFreedom wrote: Thanks for explanation. Still, I dislike point number one, because I believe marine might be changed under some circumstances and whole "any sane person" makes it really hard to say, if someone came here with some interesting idea. After all, you call your One Goal community project, right? If this was not "community project", and from start you claimed your MOD to be just yours, I would not question any of those(except for point one, which I would still attack, because saying 'no sane person would change marine' is way too overconfident and baseless claim, as I believe, there might be better version of marine somewhere out there just waiting to be found), but because you do, I felt like I have to say my protests against behavior. Also I am sorry for being so... well... I dont know polite word to say about what I have done there - but I really felt like I had to, in order to make sure, you still intend to stay community project. GL in your way of doing it... With deep apologies for being quite inpolite, FreeToss Your just discussing for the sake of discussing. Marine discussing isn't relevant at all atm. and if someone 3 months from now one makes a suggestion to it then Itwhospeaks comments will long be forgotton... Unless of course you continue bringing it up. Btw still waiting for the Terran video. | ||
|
RedGD
Germany22 Posts
A baneling, like most sac units, are very difficult to get right. They can't do too much damage, or they'll be overpowered. I know, but Banelings still work, right? Why do they work against Marines, but they should not work against air units? Modifying the baneling to be able to jump up would be incredibly difficult because either they will be super effective and will be an easily-massed unit or won't do enough damage and the ability will be useless. I know that there is a jeopardy. And there are many factors that influence it. For example widow mine. It is a "massable" unit (a unit that can be build in large numbers) and they do a lot of area damage (Can you say flat damage?), but the attack speed or rather the cooldown between attacks change a lot in this case. With the respect to the baneling, I guess, it is very similiar. Instead of a cooldown the baneling dies and there are never come a second shot. On the other side the baneling can move to the aim, but you can see that and you can respond to it. Nevertheless the old functionalities of the baneling are there and work. These functions are only extended, whereby get more variety. I´m not sure, whether the problems you are mentioned, become true!? creates overlap with other AA units With which units? I don´t see that at the moment. The big difference to other units is that Banelings are not good for a longer fight or for many small fights. Banelings dies after use. Other AA Units do not. In addition to this you can create a one second delay between activate the jump ability and jump. It is a first rough idea. Furthermore to put banelings and terror into the game is often perceived as not good, because there are to similar. So, my idea is a chance to workaround the problem and have a similar result in a novel way. ...and is overall more of a radical change than just moving the hydra to Tier 1 and modifying numbers. RedGD Can you explain why you think banelings with AA is a less radical change than a BW-esque Hydra? I don´t want say, that the hydralisk changes are a radical change. I want say many changes, you did, seems to be radical. It shouldn't refer to the hydralisk. Some hydralisk changes are not good for other reasons. It is very difficult to make big changes in an existing game like SC:BW or SC 2 without destroy a lot. I can understand, that people like the hydralisk on T 1 (T 1.5) for many different reasons. First argument: But Blizzard tries to make the difference between the races bigger. This is not easy. Not to give the Zerg a multi-usable T 1.5 AA unit is one step in the right direction. Why? All other races have T 1.5 AA units, which are also main units. Banelings are not main units. There are very specialized. There are many other units, abilities and so on, where such steps (integrating more differences) are more difficult and I think you can change the T 1 AA lack at the Zerg with other, smaller changes. Second argument In addition to this the Roach is one of the few exceptions in the Zerg philosophie. That does not destroy the philosophy, but highlights it more. The same applies to the Ultralisk. Of course, it is a fine line between them. It is not easy to find the right balance in the design of a race and it is a matter of taste, too. Third argument In my opinion the baneling changes, I have mentioned, are soft counters. You have AA on tier 1, which is contradictory, but in a manner of soft counter. This is a compromise between what you want and what Blizzard want. You don´t want Hydralisk T 1.5, you want an aggressive anti air option in T 1 (because the queen and spore crawler is only effective in the defense) and you want other things like more dynamic between roach and hydra fights and so on. That´s all correct and I support this opinion, but I think you can reach it with smaller changes. Fourth argument As much as possible small changes are good, due to the acceptance of players. If you have one version of a perfect designed SC 2, you would have a problem with the acceptance of the players, when it is to far away from the orginal. I follow your solution and I'm curious how it works. Fifth argument In my opinion, the more the Roach rises in the tier, the more similar it becomes to the Ultralisk. This is what you don´t want. In lower tiers the Roach has a higher chance to be particular. But there is no question that Blizzard's Hydralisk is also poorly designed. The Hydralisk should not be a specialized unit. It is a cheap, massable, fragile Unit like the Zergling. The task is to make the Hydralisk massable and available as early as possible. In a perfect world roaches and hydralisk have the same tier. But it isn´t and the task is to reach a similiar effect without take the easiest way. So without putting Hydralisk T 1. In my opinion, this easiest way destroy other important things. So it isn´t a good solution. Sixth argument My last argument is Zergling/Baneling/Roach are the perfect trio. Why? Zerglings are countered by Banelinges, Banelinges are countered by Roaches and Raoches and Zerglings are pretty equally powerful. But Hydralisks are countered by Banelings, too. So Zergling/Baneling could be to strong or further one dimensional play. I hope I can answer you all your questions @ topsecret221 and @ ItWhoSpeaks. If not, ask me again. By the way, I play random and I like all races. ^^ Sry for my bad english. I try my best. ^^ | ||
|
StandAloneComplex
65 Posts
On May 13 2013 01:24 RedGD wrote: I have an idea for the next patch. Instead of Hydras are tier 1, you can add additional abilities to the baneling to have anti air against mass mutas or some other units. Thanks! If you think more close about that, the idea is not so bad.Jumping baelings dont feel rigth , but what about an baeling-catapult, where baelings can roll in and accelerate in an parabolic arc/kurve up into the air. The best unit for that would be an upgrate/mutation for the swarmhost. So that baelings can roll into the wholes of the swarm hosts back, while its burrowed. To make it more skill based and different from the widdowmine, the catapult should not autoattack air units. It shoud be more simular to the fungal-projectile of the infestor, just even with an parabolic travelway: ![[image loading]](http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/database/QQ.09.07/h/tom15.1.jpg) And you hit the airunit only if the baeling connects with the airunit on its highest point of the arc. The swarmhost would shoot straigth in the direction which the swarm host is faceing, so you must position the host facing in direction of the airunit before shooting. Also if you stay longer on the mousebutton it will shoot farther.So it could be anti air and artillery against enemy bases at the same time, dependent on how long you press down the mouse button. This mutated swarm host would not be able to spawn any locusts, but woud be able to move slowly underground so that he can change faceing for the aiming . If you make the roach T1 again, which im trying to convince you later on this week . than the roach could mutate into swarmhost just like zergling mutate into baeling . It would build an perfect synergie between ling baeling roach and if the enemy tries to hardcounter with air you have the abillity to upgrade the host into catapult. That would be so cool , that i already know you will not do it, because it would be way to much fun for zerg | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
1. Making the races really different in terms of feel and gameplay is what Blizzard wants and has had some trouble with with Zerg and Protoss. Zerg only feels like a real swarm when you go ling, baneling, mutalisk, because two of those three units cost .5 supply. Having a .5 AA 1.5 ground unit is an interesting idea, but lets look at what it does to the match ups: In ZvZ, banelings can't cost effectively deny overlord scouting and will randomly blow up on them, unless you make it like the anti structure attack, which makes it less intuitive for it to be a means of AA, which is supposed to be the point. It DOES provide a solid counter to mutalisks, which is neat, but there doesn't seem to be any counter play that a 3 speed muta can do vs a 2-3 range baneling. The last thing that I take away from this scenario is that Zerg morphs are traditionally very specialized units, not generalists. The Lurker is a unit that has to give up all mobility to attack, and it kills clusters of low health units. The Broodlord/Guardian is a powerful, but slow and fragile artillery piece that needs to be protected. The Devourer only hits air and is designed to win air battles. The Overseer and Baneling are no different. In PvZ, Banelings would either brutally shut down or do nothing against Stargate play and Warp Prism openings. Which I would argue is bad for the match up given that that harassment is widely regarded as a point of interest. In TvZ, you run into the same issue as overlords with floating buildings, as well as denying medivac drops or banshees once you get enough banelings. The more I think of it, the more the problem seems to be that it is melee and fragile and a suicide unit. There is no attack and pull back micro that you can do with Queens or Hydras or Stalkers or anything like that. You HAVE to commit and there is no garentee it will be enough, which works for specialized, high risk, high reward unit like the Reaver of old, but for a massable generalist unit? It seems to be a poor fit. Here is why a 1 supply, 1.5 Hydralisk is the best answer we have seen so far: 1. It provides a solid answer to mass muta with its range and speed upgrade. It can cover ground quickly provided it has solid creep spread and costs 1/4th the gas a Mutalisk does. Getting a good concave is important as is spacing to prevent glaive bounce. Hydras are not light, but medium in this mod. Meaning that banelings don't deal 35 damage to them. While not relevant immediately, (still takes the same number of banelings to kill a hydra with no upgrades) it does become relevant once attack upgrades roll in. With +3 Melee, Banes will 2 shot Hydras in HotS, they do not in OG. 2.You can micro them like Marines in OG, meaning you can stutter step vs Zealots, Phoenix, and Banelings. Good Zerg players can express that skill with hydras vs a wide range of enemies. 3. You can have 80 hydras without taking up 160 supply. This means things like Hydra/Swarm Host or Hydra Roach can do the same sort of dqaud-based aggression that Ling/Baneling/Muta comps are famous for. This makes the game richer. 2. On the Roach. The Roach and Ultralisk are both tanky units that are there to soak up damage for their more fragile, more dangerous swarm mates. You are correct that these exceptions are just that. However, if those exceptions show up too often, they are no longer exceptions. As a designer, the challenge is often to communicate identity/fantasy through play. What message are you sending when two of your four 1.5 units have as much or more effective HP than the "tough but expensive race?" The Ultralisk is probably the best example in SC of how to show exceptions to race rules. Zerg CAN have really tough units, but they are high tech and specialized. Ultralisks were encorperated with the express purpose of killing siege tanks and other heavy artillery allowing the swarm to break on through. Roaches therefore need to occupy a different spot on the tech tree, to show that they are the Swarm's response to an obstacle. Now, you brought up a great challange that we have been grappling for the last few months: how do we avoid overlap between the Roach and Ultra? The answer basically ended up in playstyle. Roach burrow micro is cool, but undervalued in HotS. We have agressively scaled up the power and utility of small numbers of roaches by giving them much more mobility and durabity while burrowed. Meaning that you have something that is sneaking and undermining, and tough as hell to get rid of, vs a giant tank of a creature barreling down on you. They feel very different because they play very different, even if you could use them to do the same thing on occasion. 3. For reasons I stated in 1: Having Hydras as early AA is a less problematic solution than banelings. Zerg is forced to go mass queens, and while we don't want to hurt the viability of that strategy, having more options in the early game does a lot of good for playing and watching Zerg. 4. I would appreciate it if you told us what big changes are bad and why you think they are too much. We have gone overboard in the past, and are open to changing. That said, we have reasons for every change we put into the mod. We agree on the principle! We only remove units if they take away far more than they give, currently the Thor and Corruptor are the chief offenders. 5. I answered this in 2. I would invite you to play with us on Saturday evenings (it is late for you but you can see a ton of gameplay) Ultras and Roaches play VERY differently. 6. This is true! Our chief worry is that Banelings vs Hydras will destabilize the match up. We need more testing. We feel that since Hydras can comfortably outrange banelings, they can pick them off in 3-4 shots (if you have 3 hydras que up targets, you can kill banelings in a single volley) Since you can micro them well on creep, we think Hydras can do what Roaches do, counter banelings, but die to ling surrounds. | ||
|
RedGD
Germany22 Posts
Hydra 1. I agree. But the problem is Mutalisk are very fast and the posibility to fly over cliffs forces you to divide your hydras. Therefore Hydras are probably are not sufficiently effective against Mutas. In addition to this because of your anti-air attack upgrade... -Anti-air attack now requires an upgrade You can immediately take the Roaches and can build Hydras on T 2. The main problem is the time between the existence of lair and Hydralisk Den. Therefore Hydralisks feel more like a T 2.5 unit. That is the problem. Hydralisks in large numbers are to late available, but T 1.5 is to early. You say AA on T 1.5 is to early. Hydras are usually AA. Not in your version on T 1.5, I know, but therefore they should be on T 2. More on this below. 2. I agree. 3. You can have 80 hydras without taking up 160 supply. This means things like Hydra/Swarm Host or Hydra Roach can do the same sort of dqaud-based aggression that Ling/Baneling/Muta comps are famous for. This makes the game richer.[/quote] That is very good. This is also what I consider to be necessary. To make the Hydralisk to a 2 supply unit and a specialist is one of the biggest design faults of Blizzard. Roach 1. I agree. 2. I don´t agree. Zerg CAN have really tough units, but they are high tech and specialized. It have to be rare, but not only high tech or specialized. The Roach have many counters, but it is to cost efficient. Therefore the roach is too strong. The roach should to be only good with good micro, not because of its high HP or damage. Blizzard version of the roach did a little bit to much damage and or resist a little bit to much damage. Thereby it is much to easy to use and it is very often seen and very effective. There are many people who think that stalkers are to weak. That is not true. Stalkers are good, but Roaches and Marauders are a little bit to effective against stalkers in the early game. That is one reason why Protoss feel not very Protoss like. Not much units, but strong units. Roaches need a little bit more design balance in the direction of mass and more micro instead of strength and less micro. The strength should come through the mass and micro. Because of the roach is a little bit overpowered and require less micro, mass roach is/was a possible strategy. Change the Roach to make it less effective on T 1.5 and more effective on T 2 through micro and upgrades, which make the micro possible or a little bit easier to use. So on T 1.5 the roach should be weaker, but through other upgrades and micro, it may be very powerful on T 2. For example fast burrow movement speed (speed: about 2.25), fast regeneration while burrowed (8 per second) and less fast regeneration while unburrowed (2.5 per second). So it will be necessary to focus roaches. It is difficult to explain what I mean. Roaches should be like roaches. Nerved, annoying, nuisance, fast, agile and come in medium numbers, but not too big and not too little. You can´t micro large numbers of Roaches very well. This is one side effect, which increase the effect what I want. Roaches should be more effective in medium numbers than in very small or large numbers. The possible micro defined medium numbers. If you have not many roaches, you have enough micro to control this roaches. You could control more Roaches, but you don´t have more Roaches. So it is not so effective it could be. 3. I agree. 4. In the future I will telling you which changes are to much. At the moment I´m tired. ^^ 5. It would be nice, if you could upload videos on youtube. I often want watching your stream, but I'm studying and I often missed it. It would be cool, if I can watch it whenever I want. 6. ...but die to ling surrounds. That is a problem. Try to balance it from the other side. Put the Roach on T 1.5 instead of Hydras and try to solve the problems with Hydras and Roaches and so on with other design balance changes. The changes will be smaller and you will have a better acceptance of the players. I think it exist a solution with smaller changes. Good job. Thanks for reading. Sry for my bad english. I try my best. ^^ | ||
|
topsecret221
United States108 Posts
On May 14 2013 07:30 RedGD wrote: You can immediately take the Roaches and can build Hydras on T 2. The main problem is the time between the existence of lair and Hydralisk Den. Therefore Hydralisks feel more like a T 2.5 unit. That is the problem. Hydralisks in large numbers are to late available, but T 1.5 is to early. You say AA on T 1.5 is to early. Hydras are usually AA. Not in your version on T 1.5, I know, but therefore they should be on T 2. More on this below. I just wanted to point out that our hydras ARE AA by default. The main page hasn't been updated in that regard. I may respond to some of the other points in a little while. Also, the twitch channel should have the last couple streams up in the archive: http://www.twitch.tv/topsecret221/videos | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
| ||
|
Doominator10
United States515 Posts
On May 14 2013 08:02 topsecret221 wrote: I just wanted to point out that our hydras ARE AA by default. The main page hasn't been updated in that regard. I may respond to some of the other points in a little while. http://www.twitch.tv/topsecret221/videos Wait, so you mean I don't HAVE to get grooved spines against stargate play early on if I'm being aggressive :0 Wtf have I been doing with my life. 0_o Some Zerg Related concerns and questions: Hydra Dmg and Protoss: Since early on in OG's history, there have been concerns raised about hydras being too strong en masse, especially against protoss. Not specifically in a unit for unit basis, but cost for cost. It is stronger to have more or equal(ish) resources in hydras, than in protoss army (of various "standard" compositions such as zealot, stalker, collosus or zealot, immortal, storm, or etc). The issue arises if protoss does not have enough splash to compensate for the numbers advantage. Protoss splash comes in the form of collosus, and storm. Both of these can be micro'ed against, and can substantially reduce the splash that protoss desperately needs. On the reverse, a player CAN micro so much that the hitscan units (single target units) can make up for the damage lost by the splash since they are not being attacked by the splash units, but if MMM vs collosus and storm has proven it's that microing to prevent damage rarely results in losing a lot of overall damage. Personally, I think protoss are still underestimating sentries with time-warp and latent thermal surge (since collosus already have range  ) and will eventually learn effective means of dealing with mass hydra mid-mid lategame. Does the team have any notions regarding this concern? Wait out the metagame? Look to adjust splash? Look to adjust hydra values? Etc?Deep Warren and Swarm Hosts as an Evolution: Earlier we had roaches evolve into the specialized strain of swarm hosts. Firstly, I wholly agree that swarmhosts should be taken off the linear tech to hive (infestation pit.) It is a very powerful unit (and I think the meta will eventually shift to swarmhosts being the strongest tech path in ZvP in HotS), and shouldn't be on the required path to hive. (Imagine if the cyber core gave access to collosus -__- a bit extreme of an example but similar concept. Or even less extreme, collosus available straight from robo...) Back to roaches, I really liked it that swarm hosts evolved from roaches with the deep warren morph. It really seemed to fit the zerg theme of evolution (a base unit turning into a specialist strain.... unless roaches are no longer a base unit but rather a specialist. Then there'd be a specialist evolving into another specialist. A bad thing? Possibly). I'm curious as to the thought process that went into reverting the change to have them seperated. +, less units spawning straight from larva, means less hotkeys, i need means easier time adjusting DarkGrid keys | ||
| ||
