|
On December 20 2012 16:15 FoxyMayhem wrote:
Smoke: it is certainly a challenge. I don't expect front page, but with quality players there is a chance we can still get the work done that we need to do to present our proposals to Blizzard.
MNDakota: with a cheaper raven, what do you think of the viability of defending versus muta using vikings and PDD? Your opinion, and if you want to try it, I'd love to see a pair of replays.
Ya sure. I could try that. With the Seeker Missile not needing upgrades. I tried to use them against LaLush when we played but it seems that they die before they get them off sometimes.
But sure, I wouldn't mind trying that. I'll get some replays to you as soon as possible.
|
Can we get a ETA on the mod being uploaded to the EU server?
|
I played with the mod a bit the past two nights and I still have my same reservations about mech that I did in the previous post written by ItWhoSpeaks.
Basically, it comes down to the premise of "mech will never be good as long as late-game bio is viable" due to the simple fact that in order for bio to be good, they need to kill things quickly and be mobile. While achieving any sort of "mech" that satisfies the community, it needs to be inherently immobile and position-based.
This leads to the problem of Terran duality, where bio must be able to win, the same that mech would, while having superior mobility in order to be viable. Blizzard is currently trying to make up for that by making mech-based upgrades easier to acquire and mech units better in general, but none of this offers that same "why is this even working?" feel that BW mech did so well.
I believe the basis for BW mech being so good honestly had nothing to do with mech being good and the fact that bio was NOT good. THAT is what made mech so fun to play and watch. The army felt broken and incomplete, but it was just strong enough that a good player could make Terran the best race in the game.
Personally, I dislike Terran in SC2 due to the raw power of bio-based armies. The whole thing has never felt very Terran-like to me, and I don't think I am alone in that.
While ItWhoSpeaks has named the Terran strengths to be damage and supply, I have always thought he missed the part that made the race truly beautiful. Not a single ground unit had more HP than a Dragoon, and outside of the Goliath and Siege Tank (both heavy gas investments), they were all equal or less than a hydralisk.
Having 125hp marauders, 55hp marines, 400hp thors, and 135hp hellbats, not to mention medivacs that provide the fastest and most cost-effective healing in the game while simultaneously offering quick and plentiful drop capabilities removes all this.
Regardless of balance, from a design perspective, the Terran race has no weakness, where Zerg lacks raw HP and range while Protoss lacks speed, numbers, and cost-effective base units.
Terran has it all (damage, range, speed, health, flexibility, cost-effectiveness, zone control, etc.), and that makes them boring to me, or at least, I never get surprised when they win.
Just a thought and gripe I have had throughout SC2. Hope it is at least considered.
|
im down to support the cause  this definately needs more coverage though
|
Wow, I remember the design blogs and remember partially agreeing and disagreeing with them.
Actually I just checked and I didn't disagree that much.
What is your current build? I'm interested whether or not you still think auto turrets can be fixed just by tweaking the energy to cast them/amount of upgrades.
|
514 Posts
Did something happen to the Mod? I can't load it, it says the map could be deleted O.o?
I see it on my "Recently Played Maps" but when I try to Join or Create it, I simply get that error
Then I attempt to search it again, but I found nothing!! WTF?!
(Trying on AM Server), honestly I don't like to play HotS lol
|
The OneGoal map on NA Arcade says to visit www.tiny.cc/onegoal to view all the changes from regular SC2, but that website does not work. Where can I find a list of all the changes?
|
I feel that your changes to immortal were a little heavy handed and leave protoss early game extremely succeptible to terran MM pushes and zerg roach/hydra. Zealot/immortal simply can't stand up to either one. Essentially immortals were heavily nerfed, roaches/hydras buffed, marauders lost conc shell and gained significant toughness against zealots.
The immortal needs to be a better scaled version of it's current WoL iteration because it is simply giving up way to much in being moved to gateway. What about modifying hardened shields to being unresearched, starts at 12 or 14 damage cap, losing starting anti-air (not much armored Air->ground early on anyway... just v-ray and it counters armored so not sure immortal should be designed to stop it) and research at twilight or robo bay that gives anti-air and improves hardened shields to a 10-12 damage cap, somewhere in that range. Needs to retain 6 range and 2.25 speed as both roaches and stim marauders are faster than it (can run away) and with 5 range the marauders outrange/outdamage/outeverything it.
Ultimately lots of great thoughts for both Terran and Zerg, but I think your proposed ideas are VERY off for protoss that leave them more gimmicky and with less options than ever.
Your rendition of a collosus is a terrible version of the siege tank now. 2x the cost, 3x the supply, targettable by air... and 10 dps to non-light, 13.33 to light versus 2 siegetanks 23.4 to non-armor, 33.4 to armored? Instant, no overkill not dodgeable for the siege tank... all of those issues on collosus? Collosi have real issues that should be addressed, but this unit is really pretty weak in your game.
Your voidrays are just odd, and leaves toss with real issues against both vikings and corruptors.
The sentry and stalker i think were both solid ideas, guardian shield may be too expensive now unless there is an energy upgrade so sentries start with 75.
Just feel that protoss is REALLY missing something still.
|
On December 21 2012 03:45 orakiodg wrote:
I feel that your changes to immortal were a little heavy handed and leave protoss early game extremely succeptible to terran MM pushes and zerg roach/hydra. Zealot/immortal simply can't stand up to either one. Essentially immortals were heavily nerfed, roaches/hydras buffed, marauders lost conc shell and gained significant toughness against zealots.
The immortal needs to be a better scaled version of it's current WoL iteration because it is simply giving up way to much in being moved to gateway. What about modifying hardened shields to being unresearched, starts at 12 or 14 damage cap, losing starting anti-air (not much armored Air->ground early on anyway... just v-ray and it counters armored so not sure immortal should be designed to stop it) and research at twilight or robo bay that gives anti-air and improves hardened shields to a 10-12 damage cap, somewhere in that range. Needs to retain 6 range and 2.25 speed as both roaches and stim marauders are faster than it (can run away) and with 5 range the marauders outrange/outdamage/outeverything it.
Ultimately lots of great thoughts for both Terran and Zerg, but I think your proposed ideas are VERY off for protoss that leave them more gimmicky and with less options than ever.
Your rendition of a collosus is a terrible version of the siege tank now. 2x the cost, 3x the supply, targettable by air... and 10 dps to non-light, 13.33 to light versus 2 siegetanks 23.4 to non-armor, 33.4 to armored? Instant, no overkill not dodgeable for the siege tank... all of those issues on collosus? Collosi have real issues that should be addressed, but this unit is really pretty weak in your game.
Your voidrays are just odd, and leaves toss with real issues against both vikings and corruptors.
The sentry and stalker i think were both solid ideas, guardian shield may be too expensive now unless there is an energy upgrade so sentries start with 75.
Just feel that protoss is REALLY missing something still.
Regarding the collosus wouldn't it be more fun if it had a slow linear lazer attack which slowly moves towards its target.
Like every 10 second you could active the laser, and if this could combined with a nerfed version of its normal attack, then I believe we could see some awesome micro battles. Also it shouldn't be attacked my anti air, i believe collosus vs vikings and corrupters vs collosus are just plain boring. If thís linear laser attack becomes a reality we could see awesome postioinal battles where flanking with collosus and combing it with warp prism micro (since the terran/zerg probably won't have anti air to kill the warp prism), which adds another element to the matchups.
|
@Hider
Unique mechanics for attacking are fun, but when you burden one race with too many of them it makes them clunky and unwieldy. This is a problem protoss already suffers from and that I thought One Goal was trying to fix; odd, sometimes broken, mechanics that protoss depends on to be viable.
While I believe the current collosus suffers from being a boring massed a-move unit, I am not sure altering its attack to an easily avoidable attack would really benefit sc2. The areas to look at are the mechanics of it's splash, which are hyper effective against typical concaves, as well as the fact that its damage is universally good. That and lack of micro make this unit both effective and boring to watch.
So on that note I suggest that its lazers no longer be a sweeping line, but instead have a single target with beams that fork onto 2 other targets (akin to how mutas have glaive bounce) at a reduced damage (maybe like 50% on the mini lazers). Also change the damage to a bonus to light instead of just uniform solid damage. Finally look at ways of increasing micro, something along the lines of a clickable effect or mode (similar to siege for siege tanks or the new HEP blizzard plans for thors).
Proposed collosi are just clunky, and it really doesn't increase their microability and also takes the skill portion of the unit out of the protoss hands and places it in the opponents which isn't very satisfying as a player.
|
On December 21 2012 01:31 Sogetsu wrote:
Did something happen to the Mod? I can't load it, it says the map could be deleted O.o?
I see it on my "Recently Played Maps" but when I try to Join or Create it, I simply get that error
Then I attempt to search it again, but I found nothing!! WTF?!
(Trying on AM Server), honestly I don't like to play HotS lol
It has been removed from custom games and relocated to the battle.net Arcade. Search OneGoal!
On December 21 2012 01:40 purakushi wrote:The OneGoal map on NA Arcade says to visit www.tiny.cc/onegoal to view all the changes from regular SC2, but that website does not work. Where can I find a list of all the changes?
All of the changes are in the second post of this thread. We're working on a more concise version containing only the current changes, without in-depth explanation.
@ Mataza: after a long, arduous process of number tweaking the auto turret ability, we have simply removed it from the Raven and given the ability to the reaper, unlocking it at the factory with a 30 second cooldown.
@ orakiodg: we feel rather similarly, however, we are debating internally about immortal buffs that wouldn't carry over into the mid and late game. If you are having trouble running away with your immortals, try bringing a Mothership Core, or researching the Khaydarin Mobilizer upgrade before pushing out, making your immortals as fast as chargelots!
|
On December 21 2012 06:12 orakiodg wrote:
@Hider
Unique mechanics for attacking are fun, but when you burden one race with too many of them it makes them clunky and unwieldy. This is a problem protoss already suffers from and that I thought One Goal was trying to fix; odd, sometimes broken, mechanics that protoss depends on to be viable.
While I believe the current collosus suffers from being a boring massed a-move unit, I am not sure altering its attack to an easily avoidable attack would really benefit sc2. The areas to look at are the mechanics of it's splash, which are hyper effective against typical concaves, as well as the fact that its damage is universally good. That and lack of micro make this unit both effective and boring to watch.
So on that note I suggest that its lazers no longer be a sweeping line, but instead have a single target with beams that fork onto 2 other targets (akin to how mutas have glaive bounce) at a reduced damage (maybe like 50% on the mini lazers). Also change the damage to a bonus to light instead of just uniform solid damage. Finally look at ways of increasing micro, something along the lines of a clickable effect or mode (similar to siege for siege tanks or the new HEP blizzard plans for thors).
Proposed collosi are just clunky, and it really doesn't increase their microability and also takes the skill portion of the unit out of the protoss hands and places it in the opponents which isn't very satisfying as a player.
We are also continuing to adjust the colossus and are tossing around more ideas internally about its attack design.
The unfortunate thing is that modifying this involves two things: battling our internal design group to make the ability both fun and useful, AND battling the editor, because it quite often refuses to cooperate with our efforts.
|
On December 21 2012 06:12 orakiodg wrote:
@Hider
Unique mechanics for attacking are fun, but when you burden one race with too many of them it makes them clunky and unwieldy. This is a problem protoss already suffers from and that I thought One Goal was trying to fix; odd, sometimes broken, mechanics that protoss depends on to be viable.
While I believe the current collosus suffers from being a boring massed a-move unit, I am not sure altering its attack to an easily avoidable attack would really benefit sc2. The areas to look at are the mechanics of it's splash, which are hyper effective against typical concaves, as well as the fact that its damage is universally good. That and lack of micro make this unit both effective and boring to watch.
So on that note I suggest that its lazers no longer be a sweeping line, but instead have a single target with beams that fork onto 2 other targets (akin to how mutas have glaive bounce) at a reduced damage (maybe like 50% on the mini lazers). Also change the damage to a bonus to light instead of just uniform solid damage. Finally look at ways of increasing micro, something along the lines of a clickable effect or mode (similar to siege for siege tanks or the new HEP blizzard plans for thors).
Proposed collosi are just clunky, and it really doesn't increase their microability and also takes the skill portion of the unit out of the protoss hands and places it in the opponents which isn't very satisfying as a player.
Yes that was what I felt as well with Onegoals proposed suggestion. Its still an a-moving unit, but now it requires even more skill to play against than previsouly. My suggestion however makes the collosus easy to learn (it stilll has the normal attack which is just a bit worse than previosuly), but hard to master as the linear laser attack adds a postional element (which could be activated every 10 second or something like that).. Maybe the terran can avoid 2-3 linear attacks from the collosus but if you have position or flank with the collosus (play intelligecent with them) you can make it almost impossible for the terran to avoid taking damage from the attack if he issn't aware that he is getting flanked.
I think my proposed collosus can create extremely interest scenarios and "wow-moments".
I honestly don't see any wow-moments with Onegoals suggestions. Its just goanna be the same thing as when terran kites chargelots; When we start saw it (at WOL beta) it was impressive, but then we got used to it, and now it is just standard. Microing against these firebombs will never give a WOW-moments which creates interesting games.
|
On December 21 2012 06:14 topsecret221 wrote:
@ orakiodg: we feel rather similarly, however, we are debating internally about immortal buffs that wouldn't carry over into the mid and late game. If you are having trouble running away with your immortals, try bringing a Mothership Core, or researching the Khaydarin Mobilizer upgrade before pushing out, making your immortals as fast as chargelots!
Last version I had played had Khaydarin Mobilizer upgrade immortal movespeed to 2.5, if that has changed I just hadn't had a chance to test it yet. If not though that was still .5 below roaches off creep, 1.4 below on creep, and .75 below stim marine/marauder. It is a core issue, or perhaps feature, of protoss is that they are generally less mobile than anything but mech terran. This is one of the things that I think lead to the Protoss deathball identify in WoL, its generally lower mobility and unit interdependancy made it unsafe to try to take map control because it was too easy to get flanked, and the differing movement speeds of units cause issues with those interpendant units being in position to actually support eachother.
That being said, I just feel that roaches are simply too effective against immortals considering how effective hydras/zerglings both are against them as well. Just leaves such an imbalanced feeling midgame that you REALLY struggle with if going for a gateway composition. Now, protoss does still have some air openings but I do largely feel that Blizzard has reached a better state for those in HotS than your map currently, only because I just feel odd about the purpose/use of voidrays. The idea of them as zone denail intrigues me but just not sure if you are quite there yet with it.
The other thing that was odd to me was that tanks were reduced to 2 supply but you want a 3 supply immortal. Seems that if you are looking from a cost or useability perspective the units are really quite similar, and I am curious what the reasoning ultimately was for 3 supply immortal? Was it just because they were too potent when massed late game, and would a better solution be ultimately more stat reductions with additional cost/supply reductions as well to avoid how potent massing them gets to be lategame.
|
On December 21 2012 06:19 topsecret221 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 06:12 orakiodg wrote:
@Hider
Unique mechanics for attacking are fun, but when you burden one race with too many of them it makes them clunky and unwieldy. This is a problem protoss already suffers from and that I thought One Goal was trying to fix; odd, sometimes broken, mechanics that protoss depends on to be viable.
While I believe the current collosus suffers from being a boring massed a-move unit, I am not sure altering its attack to an easily avoidable attack would really benefit sc2. The areas to look at are the mechanics of it's splash, which are hyper effective against typical concaves, as well as the fact that its damage is universally good. That and lack of micro make this unit both effective and boring to watch.
So on that note I suggest that its lazers no longer be a sweeping line, but instead have a single target with beams that fork onto 2 other targets (akin to how mutas have glaive bounce) at a reduced damage (maybe like 50% on the mini lazers). Also change the damage to a bonus to light instead of just uniform solid damage. Finally look at ways of increasing micro, something along the lines of a clickable effect or mode (similar to siege for siege tanks or the new HEP blizzard plans for thors).
Proposed collosi are just clunky, and it really doesn't increase their microability and also takes the skill portion of the unit out of the protoss hands and places it in the opponents which isn't very satisfying as a player. We are also continuing to adjust the colossus and are tossing around more ideas internally about its attack design. The unfortunate thing is that modifying this involves two things: battling our internal design group to make the ability both fun and useful, AND battling the editor, because it quite often refuses to cooperate with our efforts.
I understand this, and appreciate your efforts a lot.
Btw, when will this get to EU?
|
Played a few games the other day. Although their are some things i disagree with and agree with the most notable thing i found is that delayed warp gate is wonderful. It is so much more dynamic and refreshing to actually macro off of my structures+rally then have instant reinforcements.
I have mixed feelings about the early immortal. I like how it is larger (like the dragoon) so it doesn't clump up like stalkers which makes it easier to micro wounded ones back. On the other hand it still feels weird not to have the stalkers mobility in the early game to poke in and out at marines and stuff. Of course the immortal speed upgrade is cool lol.
I still gotta play around more and see what other conclusions i can come to P:
|
On December 21 2012 06:22 orakiodg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 06:14 topsecret221 wrote:
@ orakiodg: we feel rather similarly, however, we are debating internally about immortal buffs that wouldn't carry over into the mid and late game. If you are having trouble running away with your immortals, try bringing a Mothership Core, or researching the Khaydarin Mobilizer upgrade before pushing out, making your immortals as fast as chargelots! Last version I had played had Khaydarin Mobilizer upgrade immortal movespeed to 2.5, if that has changed I just hadn't had a chance to test it yet. If not though that was still .5 below roaches off creep, 1.4 below on creep, and .75 below stim marine/marauder. It is a core issue, or perhaps feature, of protoss is that they are generally less mobile than anything but mech terran. This is one of the things that I think lead to the Protoss deathball identify in WoL, its generally lower mobility and unit interdependancy made it unsafe to try to take map control because it was too easy to get flanked, and the differing movement speeds of units cause issues with those interpendant units being in position to actually support eachother.
It appears you are a little bit behind, then.  Check us out on the Arcade, under OneGoal.
Currently, Immortal base speed is 2.25 (the same as a marine), and the upgrade puts them up to 2.75, which is chargelot speed.
Those are some very interesting points. We have been discussing the possibility of increasing zealot shields to 60, rather than 50, to try and beef up gateway just a bit more.
On December 21 2012 06:22 orakiodg wrote:
That being said, I just feel that roaches are simply too effective against immortals considering how effective hydras/zerglings both are against them as well. Just leaves such an imbalanced feeling midgame that you REALLY struggle with if going for a gateway composition. Now, protoss does still have some air openings but I do largely feel that Blizzard has reached a better state for those in HotS than your map currently, only because I just feel odd about the purpose/use of voidrays. The idea of them as zone denail intrigues me but just not sure if you are quite there yet with it.
Our Void Ray certainly is unique among the unit revamps, considering the severity of it's overhaul. However, it's current iteration is geared specifically towards making it easier to secure and hold a 3rd, esp. on maps like Cloud Kingdom, and it shreds through most lower-tiered zerg units, such as the hydralisk, zerglings, roaches, and locusts. With it's ranged upgrade, it can also do incredibly significant damage to much of Terran bio as well, including Marines.
On December 21 2012 06:22 orakiodg wrote:
The other thing that was odd to me was that tanks were reduced to 2 supply but you want a 3 supply immortal. Seems that if you are looking from a cost or useability perspective the units are really quite similar, and I am curious what the reasoning ultimately was for 3 supply immortal? Was it just because they were too potent when massed late game, and would a better solution be ultimately more stat reductions with additional cost/supply reductions as well to avoid how potent massing them gets to be lategame.
In the current version, Immortals are simply 2 supply.
On December 21 2012 06:26 Hider wrote:
I understand this, and appreciate your efforts a lot.
Btw, when will this get to EU?
We apologize for the delay... it should be coming up within the next couple of days, as we are having a couple of bumps and scratches getting onto that server (no one on our team is from the EU).
|
|
|
Stalkers and immortal roles are too alike. I feel immortal should go back to robo and just a general gateway buff will do. Sentry can remain at robo. T1.5 should be able to kite marines and zerglings w no speed.
|
On December 21 2012 00:10 Jermstuddog wrote:
Personally, I dislike Terran in SC2 due to the raw power of bio-based armies. The whole thing has never felt very Terran-like to me, and I don't think I am alone in that.. While you most certainly aren't alone, you are also not the (overwhelming) majority. Many progamers even have said they love the addition of the marauder in WoL to give bio a shot. Polt, Flash, In Dove, have all said in interviews that they feel their favourite new WoL unit was the marauder.
While it's all subjective, I always thought bio was far more exciting than mech. And it honestly fits better lore wise too. You got a band of human beings, technologically outclassed by the protoss, numerically outclassed by the Zerg. How realistic is it that they would approach their war by massing up tanks which for some reason prove superior to the technological superiority of the mighty protoss and the vast Zerg swarm? doesn't seem nearly as likely as that they would rely on hit and run tactics and guerilla warfare and some terran ingenuity to beat the odds and beat enemies which by all reasonable inspection would have armies that are superior to theirs in straight up combat right?
Lore aside, I think this slow burning mech style is just extremely boring compare to multi pronged drops. I also never got why people use the word 'positional' for it. It's no less ore more positional than hit and run tactics such as bio drops, link runbies, blink stalker snipes, those things have everything to do with proper positioning of armies and most importantly punishing improper positioning of the enemy. I don't think 'positional' is the correct word as much as 'defensively'. The positioning of mech comes down to being in position to defend and eventually sustain minimal damage so you can get your powerful mech max. The positioning of bio comes down to being in position to attack and cause damage so your opponent cannot get their powerful mech max.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
