|
On July 23 2015 02:04 BlackLilium wrote:
This is an interesting take on the subject indeed!
Now that you mention it, I believe Starbow uses a similar method?
I dont know what StarBow does. I read through their changes once but I forgot most of it by now.
On July 23 2015 02:04 BlackLilium wrote:P.S. Happy to see that you keep an eye on this thread 
Of course I am. I told you all I want is a better SC2 experience. One way or another.
Even if it wont be me who does it I can still dream that somebody can do it eventually.
|
I'm no pro at the editor myself and it's always difficult to know for sure what one is trying to accomplish, but have you tried tinkering with "Hatchery Spawn Larva" under requirements? It says "CountUnit(Larva,CompleteOnlyAtUnit) < 3"
So it counts the amount of Larva the target unit (Hatchery) owns which must be less than 3. Either this is already what you need, or you need to edit it slightly.
|
I am not a pro either, learning stuff as I need them. That's why I am asking those questions
The problem with Requirements is that while they are flexible, they can be used only in few places. I didn't find any field in an ability or effect that would take a Requirement as a type. Instead, Validators are more often used.
The inject larva effect has an effect "Queen - Spawn Mutant Larva (Apply Timer Behavior)". Within it there are 3 validators:
- Is Hatchery Lair or Hive
- Not Spawning Mutant Larva (checks that inject larva is not already in effect on the given building)
- Not Contaminated
I need a 4th one which would check the number of spawned larva, checking if it is less than 4. Unfortunately you cannot put a Requirement over there.
In the meantime I got a PM from PurpleStreak who may have a solution how to track origin hatchery from larvas. I will experiment his approach.
Edit: he actually solved the whole problem. I just need to learn exactly how it works and reimplement it in the mod.
Many thanks!!
|
Experimental Branch changes
- Terran
- MULE casting range set to 20
- MULE cooldown set to 30s (xPrimuSx's suggestion)
- Zerg
- Queen Larva Inject is now auto-casted (phantomfive's suggestion)
- Spawn Larvae can be casted only on Hatcheries (Lairs, Hives) that have 3 or less larvae (thank you PurpleStreak for implementation). When extra larvae hatch, Zerg players need to utilize them as soon as possible in order to enable another Larva Injection. (based on Pontius Pirate's idea)
- Queen starting energy: 25 -> 23. This minor change gives Zerg a chance to "grab" the Queen before it auto-injects, if the player has a different job for it (e.g. plant a creep tumor)
- Protoss
- Chronoboost is now an ability of the Mothership Core
- Chronoboost cast range set to 5
- Chronoboost energy cost: 25 -> 50
- Chronoboost speedup: 50% -> 100% (effectively: same energy cost for same time gain, but in shorter time span)
- Chronoboost can be casted on any building: friendly, ally, hostile
- Chronoboost speeds up production time, research time, fire rate, shield regeneration and energy regeneration
- Photon Overcharge duration: 60s -> 15s
- Photon Overcharge can be combined with Chronoboost for double DPS but half duration (7.5s)
- Time Warp removed from Mothership Core (still available in Mothership)
- Mass Recall removed from Mothership Core (still available in Mothership)
- Any number of Mothership Cores can be built
- Any number of Motherships can be built
- Warpin time of Gateway units in a Gateway now matches Warpgate
Yeah, the changes to the Mothership Core are rather big, but the unit really needs it. Hopefully that kind of changes will be the first and last of that kind.
|
Quick update: The stand-alone map "SCI - Coda LE" now uses the Experimental branch as well. The loading screen has been updated to include the newest changes.
With the amount of changes that we already did in the "Starcraft Improved" I think it is time to do some playtesting - at least to get a feel where we are at. For that reason I am looking for opponents for some testing games. Or maybe some of you already played - in which case, can you share your experience and replays?
|
I can't believe I didn't think of this before, but what if Warp Gates, upon finishing, were caught in the middle of cooldown?
|
On July 24 2015 06:13 Pontius Pirate wrote:
I can't believe I didn't think of this before, but what if Warp Gates, upon finishing, were caught in the middle of cooldown?
It would be the same as increasing the Gateway-to-Warpgate transformation time. Or ... ?
|
On July 24 2015 14:16 BlackLilium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 06:13 Pontius Pirate wrote:
I can't believe I didn't think of this before, but what if Warp Gates, upon finishing, were caught in the middle of cooldown? It would be the same as increasing the Gateway-to-Warpgate transformation time. Or ... ?
Ooh, I didn't explain this very well. What I'm trying to get at is that producing a unit causing the Gateway/Warpgate to enter Warpgate cooldown, regardless of whether that unit was finished via warping in or via Gateway production time. That way, you can still convert your freshly built Gateways to Warpgates in the lategame with no production stalling, but converting from Gateway to Warpgate doesn't give you an extra production cycle at the point of conversion. In my head, it seemed like a way of eliminating the frustrating part for the opponents without including new grievances for the Protoss player, aside from that specific, targeted nerf to production cycles.
|
On July 23 2015 07:53 BlackLilium wrote:Experimental Branch changes[*] Protoss - Chronoboost is now an ability of the Mothership Core
- Chronoboost cast range set to 5
- Chronoboost energy cost: 25 -> 50
- Chronoboost speedup: 50% -> 100% (effectively: same energy cost for same time gain, but in shorter time span)
- Chronoboost can be casted on any building: friendly, ally, hostile
- Chronoboost speeds up production time, research time, fire rate, shield regeneration and energy regeneration
- Photon Overcharge duration: 60s -> 15s
- Photon Overcharge can be combined with Chronoboost for double DPS but half duration (7.5s)
- Time Warp removed from Mothership Core (still available in Mothership)
- Mass Recall removed from Mothership Core (still available in Mothership)
- Any number of Mothership Cores can be built
- Any number of Motherships can be built
- Warpin time of Gateway units in a Gateway now matches Warpgate
Yeah, the changes to the Mothership Core are rather big, but the unit really needs it. Hopefully that kind of changes will be the first and last of that kind.
I agree about the tension on chronoboost vs other spell/ability to create some decisions and that is what you did. But I do not agree about moving it to MsC. I believe that much simpler solution would be to move MsC abilities to Nexus instead.
There should be an upgrade to nexus (similar to orbital command for Terran) which grants access to chronoboost and small recall (with radius of FF). Additionally some form of defensive ability (like photon overcharge or shield battery) could be a 3rd ability. All abilities would use energy form same pool and therefore create a tension between those spells. Then MsC could be removed.
What I propose actually is in fact what Starbow did and I think that is the best approach without strange and gimmicky units like MsC.
|
The proposals for protoss macro mechanics are:
1) Make protoss like zerg (build special unit from main building with 3 abilities)
2) Make protoss like terran (upgrade main building to get 3 abilities)
Why dont you instead try to make protoss like protoss? I can not believe there is no third option here to diversify the races.
|
I do like the Starbow solution as well. They introduce a new upgrade to Nexus and they completely remove the Mothership Core. However, in the spirit of keeping the HotS units I favor the solution which repurposes the MSC, rather than replaces it with a building upgrade. But the spirit is not the only reason:
Mothership Core has offensive abilities, which significantly influence the battle. If we move any of them to the Nexus, or introduce a new one (e.g. I have seen suggestions of having force-fields tied to Nexus) then we eliminate the possibility of the opponent to counteract them by killing the MSC. Moreover, the range of these abilities becomes a problem: either it is short reducing their usefulness, or they come "out of the blue" for the opponent.
I would also like to draw your attention of a new use of the SCI Chronoboost. It speeds everything, including the fire rate. When casted on a photon cannon, it will double its DPS. This is my response to what I have seen in:
"Would you like to see additional Chronoboost use?"
but with that, chronoboost itself should also not come "out of the blue".
On July 24 2015 17:53 RoomOfMush wrote:
The proposals for protoss macro mechanics are:
1) Make protoss like zerg (build special unit from main building with 3 abilities)
2) Make protoss like terran (upgrade main building to get 3 abilities)
Why dont you instead try to make protoss like protoss? I can not believe there is no third option here to diversify the races.
To my defense: the idea of building Mothership Core from the Nexus is not mine - blame Blizzard
I am just giving MSC more of a macro functionality. I would argue that it now stands somewhere between Terran and Zerg: MSC construction halts normal operation of Nexus (like Terran), you get a macro unit (like Zerg) which is flying (unique) and iteracts with other buildings (unique).
True, it is not something completely different but I believe it keeps a fair amount of uniqueness... On the other hand, one of goals of "Starcraft Improved" is to avoid creating something completely new that has no similarities in SC WoL/HotS/Betas.
I think it all ties together nicely, resolving multiple problems at the same time (expanded chronoboost usage, energy competition, MSC massability and repurpose, Gateway construction time vs proxy cheese OP-ness). However, I am willing to discuss and possibly change or revert some things if you think another solution would be better. However: new buildings and addons, or complete unit removal - that is something I really want to avoid.
What I am currently worried about is that Protoss early game is a bit slow, but it is hard to compare to other races without a proper testing. Also, the normal MSC damage output may be a problem. You can now build 4 of those things and rush the opponent. It's slow and costly, but without any AA it may be a problem.
We need to playtest this. RoomOfMush, egrimm, Pontius Pirate or anyone else reading it - would you be willing to play a couple of matches? Where? When?
|
On July 24 2015 17:17 Pontius Pirate wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 14:16 BlackLilium wrote:On July 24 2015 06:13 Pontius Pirate wrote:
I can't believe I didn't think of this before, but what if Warp Gates, upon finishing, were caught in the middle of cooldown? It would be the same as increasing the Gateway-to-Warpgate transformation time. Or ... ? Ooh, I didn't explain this very well. What I'm trying to get at is that producing a unit causing the Gateway/Warpgate to enter Warpgate cooldown, regardless of whether that unit was finished via warping in or via Gateway production time. That way, you can still convert your freshly built Gateways to Warpgates in the lategame with no production stalling, but converting from Gateway to Warpgate doesn't give you an extra production cycle at the point of conversion. In my head, it seemed like a way of eliminating the frustrating part for the opponents without including new grievances for the Protoss player, aside from that specific, targeted nerf to production cycles.
Do I understand it correctly: so, after a unit is built, a gateway cannot be converted to a warpgate for X seconds?
I am not sure if it will change much. When rushing your opponent, you usually stop production anyway when warpgate tech is nearly finished. You move out, put a proxy pylon, spend extra money for extra gateways and when warpgate finally finished, you have a pylon and army already near the opponent. You reinforce with a round of warpin and push.
|
On July 24 2015 18:35 BlackLilium wrote:
I do like the Starbow solution as well. They introduce a new upgrade to Nexus and they completely remove the Mothership Core. However, in the spirit of keeping the HotS units I favor the solution which repurposes the MSC, rather than replaces it with a building upgrade.
Well from the spirit point of view I understand, still however I find SB solution more elegant and also less problematic 
You already mentioned a problem with flying, massable (non-hero I mean) unit in early game. It may be tricky to find proper balance. Also mind You that originally MsC was intended as a unit "attached" to a Nexus without ability to move, only to teleport between Nexi and probably made singular because Mothership is a hero unit itself.
Mothership Core has offensive abilities, which significantly influence the battle. If we move any of them to the Nexus, or introduce a new one (e.g. I have seen suggestions of having force-fields tied to Nexus) then we eliminate the possibility of the opponent to counteract them by killing the MSC. Moreover, the range of these abilities becomes a problem: either it is short reducing their usefulness, or they come "out of the blue" for the opponent.
To be honest I am not a fun of offensive MsC abilities which in fact is simply Time Warp. I think Protoss can manage fights without it with simply tiny tweaks to gateway units which I believe are to come with conjunction to Warp gate mechanic changes.
From the defensive standpoint there is Recall & photon overcharge. I believe that moving recall to nexus is a non-issue, it is true that you can possibly snipe MsC when recalling but that happens very rarely and also opponents rarely try to do so.
I agree to some extent about PO (or other defensive spell introduced instead) and no counter play if placed on Nexus. Ideally I would scrap PO entirely because it is not fun nor entertaining ability and its sole purpose is to help Protoss survive Gateway timings and Terran onslaughts. but this is only possible with warpgate mechanic changed + gateway units buff OR introduction of other, more interesting ability instead of PO.
My proposal would be small "buff" ability like shield recharge or energy refill. Both with range 10-20 and channel of let's say 5-10 sec. There would be a counter play with opponent pushing protoss and seeing crucial unit being recharged/refill could try to snipe it.
I would also like to draw your attention of a new use of the SCI Chronoboost. It speeds everything, including the fire rate. When casted on a photon cannon, it will double its DPS. This is my response to what I have seen in: " Would you like to see additional Chronoboost use?" but with that, chronoboost itself should also not come "out of the blue".
I read that thread but I must say that I don't agree about increasing CB usefulness as it is really flexible ability already. what is needed thou is previously mentioned "tension" with other abilities creating choices and decisions. CB is fine I believe - it is strong enough to make a difference but not ground-breaking. Also it is why guys in SB used it as a foundations for macromachnics of all races :
We need to playtest this. RoomOfMush, egrimm, Pontius Pirate or anyone else reading it - would you be willing to play a couple of matches? Where? When?
I can play However it is always a matter of time as I'm going on vacation next week :D Other than that I would gladly help
|
I played some quick computer matches yesterday with Zerg, and although having autocast Spawn Larva felt like a massive weight was lifted off my shoulders, I felt like there was also 0 decision making involved. The Queens pretty much made sure every Hatchery now has 7 Larva instead of 3. (or max 7 versus max 19 (?) in HotS)
To this end I once again want to propose temporary timed life Larva that die if you don't make use of them quick enough. This would be in line with MULE's lifespan and Chrono Boost also not lasting forever.
Either that or indeed as I said Hatchery's entering a nerf-buff cooldown state after Spawn Larva or something like that.
I also think some going back to the drawing board is required. What exactly do we want? Do we want to be able to stockpile Larva? Do we want to cast a dozen Spawn Larva only at times when we need them?
Bah, I'm glad I removed MULE, Chrono Boost and Spawn Larva from my mod
|
On July 24 2015 21:16 Masemium wrote:
I played some quick computer matches yesterday with Zerg, and although having autocast Spawn Larva felt like a massive weight was lifted off my shoulders, I felt like there was also 0 decision making involved. The Queens pretty much made sure every Hatchery now has 7 Larva instead of 3. (or max 7 versus max 19 (?) in HotS)
To this end I once again want to propose temporary timed life Larva that die if you don't make use of them quick enough. This would be in line with MULE's lifespan and Chrono Boost also not lasting forever.
You are right, that the burden of spawn-larva is lifted. However, have you noticed that you cannot inject more larva until your larva count drops down to 3 or less?
Consequently, you lose potential larva and you get your queen energy up not by forgetting the injects, but by forgetting to use up the extra larva immediately. Contrary to injection, however, using up larva is a more meaningful choice that should be performed in a timed fashion. You need to chose the unit you want, you need resources, supply and tech.
In an action-packed match, when you constantly produce and trade fighting units (e.g. ZvZ zergling/baneling fights) the changes will be a clear buff - giving you a bit more time for microing all that stuff. But in a more passive play when you macro up and do heavy techs, this may actually nerf you. You cannot just sit on larva and build emergency army when attacked. You need to either make an earlier decision to build an army, or you need extra macro hatches.
Consequently, I think that while with the changes we reduced a couple of meaningless clicks, the timed attention (every 40 game-seconds) to what you have is still required.
|
On July 24 2015 21:09 egrimm wrote:
To be honest I am not a fun of offensive MsC abilities which in fact is simply Time Warp. I think Protoss can manage fights without it with simply tiny tweaks to gateway units which I believe are to come with conjunction to Warp gate mechanic changes.
I think so too. That's why SCI version of MSC does not have Time Warp. Massing Time Warp bubbles could be problematic. We kept them on Mothership though.
On July 24 2015 21:09 egrimm wrote:
From the defensive standpoint there is Recall & photon overcharge. I believe that moving recall to nexus is a non-issue, it is true that you can possibly snipe MsC when recalling but that happens very rarely and also opponents rarely try to do so.
Sometimes the opponent does try to snipe it off, especially when he has air. However, Mass Recall on Nexus can be problematic for other reasons too:
- Recall becomes available to fast-moving groups - in particular: Stalkers. Imagine a group of 20 blink stalkers running into your base, sniping 1 or 2 key buildings and then... puff.... disappear, right the moment you got them cornered.
- Recall on Nexus would allow you to use recall multiple times, negating any attempts of the opponent splitting his army and attacking into 2 or more bases simultaneously. That's also the reason why the massable MSC does not have this ability either.
- And simply: having access to teleport without a unit to manage it would be so much easier
On July 24 2015 21:09 egrimm wrote:
My proposal would be small "buff" ability like shield recharge or energy refill. Both with range 10-20 and channel of let's say 5-10 sec. There would be a counter play with opponent pushing protoss and seeing crucial unit being recharged/refill could try to snipe it.
In general I like the idea of shield recharge ability (on either Nexus or MSC). But that would be a completely new ability.
|
With those nerfs to MSC you will really need to buff the gateway units now! Or at least bring back recall. Or we will see Protoss being super passive again...
|
On July 25 2015 01:53 BrokenSegment wrote:
With those nerfs to MSC you will really need to buff the gateway units now! Or at least bring back recall. Or we will see Protoss being super passive again...
They are already buffed by a tiny bit. Also: you now produce them faster from regular Gateways.
This should, hopefully, give Protoss a fighting chance before warpgates, both defensively and offensively.
At this point we need matches to verify where gateway units stand right now.
|
On July 24 2015 18:40 BlackLilium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 17:17 Pontius Pirate wrote:On July 24 2015 14:16 BlackLilium wrote:On July 24 2015 06:13 Pontius Pirate wrote:
I can't believe I didn't think of this before, but what if Warp Gates, upon finishing, were caught in the middle of cooldown? It would be the same as increasing the Gateway-to-Warpgate transformation time. Or ... ? Ooh, I didn't explain this very well. What I'm trying to get at is that producing a unit causing the Gateway/Warpgate to enter Warpgate cooldown, regardless of whether that unit was finished via warping in or via Gateway production time. That way, you can still convert your freshly built Gateways to Warpgates in the lategame with no production stalling, but converting from Gateway to Warpgate doesn't give you an extra production cycle at the point of conversion. In my head, it seemed like a way of eliminating the frustrating part for the opponents without including new grievances for the Protoss player, aside from that specific, targeted nerf to production cycles. Do I understand it correctly: so, after a unit is built, a gateway cannot be converted to a warpgate for X seconds? I am not sure if it will change much. When rushing your opponent, you usually stop production anyway when warpgate tech is nearly finished. You move out, put a proxy pylon, spend extra money for extra gateways and when warpgate finally finished, you have a pylon and army already near the opponent. You reinforce with a round of warpin and push.
Not quite. It gets converted to a Warpgate just fine, so it doesn't interfere with their macroing process. But to do a specific example,
1) you produce a Stalker and then
2) you immediately convert the Warpgate.
3) The Warpgate completes and
4) is stuck in "warpgate cooldown" for 32 seconds, the time it would be stalled out for had you just warped in a Stalker, the type of unit that you had just finished building from the Gateway. Does that make sense?
|
On July 24 2015 23:06 BlackLilium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 21:09 egrimm wrote:
From the defensive standpoint there is Recall & photon overcharge. I believe that moving recall to nexus is a non-issue, it is true that you can possibly snipe MsC when recalling but that happens very rarely and also opponents rarely try to do so. Sometimes the opponent does try to snipe it off, especially when he has air. However, Mass Recall on Nexus can be problematic for other reasons too: - Recall becomes available to fast-moving groups - in particular: Stalkers. Imagine a group of 20 blink stalkers running into your base, sniping 1 or 2 key buildings and then... puff.... disappear, right the moment you got them cornered.
That's why I proposed really small radius (like Forcefields) for Recall "field" You cannot "contain" 20 blink stalkers in such small area, especially that stalkers have also bigger model than zelots I believe? You would be able to recall max 6-8 units with properly set radius on ability.
[*] Recall on Nexus would allow you to use recall multiple times, negating any attempts of the opponent splitting his army and attacking into 2 or more bases simultaneously. That's also the reason why the massable MSC does not have this ability either.
SB has that ability called Rift which is basically recall but You can only recall max 5 units. I suggested just smaller radius to achieve similar effect (allow to recall only small packs of units) but it seems more natural and logical than hard cap on units.
Remember that It costs energy (probably a lot) which could be used for chrono boost your tech or production or you could use that "defensive-ability-on-nexus". What I want to say is that it works in SB and I think that with right energy cost + small radius + recall taking more time for example it is possible to balance it
[*] And simply: having access to teleport without a unit to manage it would be so much easier
Well that is true You have no Arbiter/MsC so It may be slightly easier to manage but is it necessarily that bad in the end?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
