|
On October 04 2012 22:50 Kamwah wrote:
They already turn into BLs while being semi-useful in their pre-evolution state. I don't think they need changing tbh
Changing means changing their ability, the Corruption, not them as unit... And it is terrible design that you are forced to make units that are useless(In case enemy isn't making air units or that get countered by Corruptors) to be able to transform them into units that are useful.
|
On October 04 2012 23:37 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 22:50 Kamwah wrote:
They already turn into BLs while being semi-useful in their pre-evolution state. I don't think they need changing tbh Changing means changing their ability, the Corruption, not them as unit... And it is terrible design that you are forced to make units that are useless(In case enemy isn't making air units or that get countered by Corruptors) to be able to transform them into units that are useful.
It's not terrible design. If you only want Broodlords, then making corruptors and turning them into broodlords just means more clicks and more time, than spawning broodlords from eggs directly. Designwise this is completly fine.
What is not fine is that the corruptor has no "natural" micro potential (not faster than other air units, not higher ranged) and basically no ability micro. You use corruption (or you don't because the difference isn't gamedeciding most of the time) when you can and simply on the biggest units you can click on and the effect isn't influencial enough to really provoke any micro from corruptors (like you have to focus corrupted units, else they are inefficient) nor from their opponents (like you have to get out of range with corrupted units asap, or they will go down way to easily).
As a Master Zerg, I can't even tell you when I used corruption the last time, as it is so insignificant to gameplay that I don't know if I use it at all these days, or if I do I don't remember it.
I agree that not every unit has to have a lot of depth outside of what it does, but I think it should at least have a little bit of it, especially if the unit is not interesting strategywise.
|
What is not fine is that the corruptor has no "natural" micro potential (not faster than other air units, not higher ranged) and basically no ability micro. You use corruption (or you don't because the difference isn't gamedeciding most of the time) when you can and simply on the biggest units you can click on and the effect isn't influencial enough to really provoke any micro from corruptors (like you have to focus corrupted units, else they are inefficient) nor from their opponents (like you have to get out of range with corrupted units asap, or they will go down way to easily).
As a Master Zerg, I can't even tell you when I used corruption the last time, as it is so insignificant to gameplay that I don't know if I use it at all these days, or if I do I don't remember it.
I agree that not every unit has to have a lot of depth outside of what it does, but I think it should at least have a little bit of it, especially if the unit is not interesting strategywise.
Exactly my point. Corruption is right there with the Thor's 250mm cannon.
It's not terrible design. If you only want Broodlords, then making corruptors and turning them into broodlords just means more clicks and more time, than spawning broodlords from eggs directly. Designwise this is completly fine.
I don't think that Morphing is bad design, but Morphing from Corruptors, that most of the time won't be even used when you are rushing Brood Lords, is.
I don't like the comparison between the SC2 and BW, but for example, Mutalisks in BW are also used for harassment and aren't that good in direct engagements. In the late game, when you are left with Mutalisks, and when there is basically nothing you can do with them anynore, you change them into Guardians so you can use them for harassing expansions etc.
How currently SC2 works, you go for Mutalisks/Roaches, then you start making Corruptors just for the sake of Brood Lords, while you sacrifice Mutalisks/Roaches to free the supply for mass Infestors and Brood Lords. Sorry, that is bad design, at least it is in my eyes. But then again, that is because Corruptors aren't used for anything except for anti-air because they don't have anything that affects ground as good as Vikings or Phoenixes. So, if the Corruption is somehow changed, and allows Corruptors to be better units, the design wouldn't be half bad as it is now in my opinion.
|
Colossi have the same "boring" that the corrupter has. The reason they aren't changing corruptors is because they aren't changing colossus. At least if you make corruptors, you will eventually get broods anyway. if I make colossus and you make corrupters..then my colossus are just junk.
|
On October 05 2012 00:05 TheResidentEvil wrote:
Colossi have the same "boring" that the corrupter has. The reason they aren't changing corruptors is because they aren't changing colossus. At least if you make corruptors, you will eventually get broods anyway. if I make colossus and you make corrupters..then my colossus are just junk.
That is like saying that if you make Mothership, my Infestors and Brood Lords are just junk... That is not how this game works. If you have Motership and Archons, I certainly can't just a-click with Corruptors. Even so, I've seen pro Protoss players go with the Colossi until the late late game.
|
On October 05 2012 00:02 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +What is not fine is that the corruptor has no "natural" micro potential (not faster than other air units, not higher ranged) and basically no ability micro. You use corruption (or you don't because the difference isn't gamedeciding most of the time) when you can and simply on the biggest units you can click on and the effect isn't influencial enough to really provoke any micro from corruptors (like you have to focus corrupted units, else they are inefficient) nor from their opponents (like you have to get out of range with corrupted units asap, or they will go down way to easily).
As a Master Zerg, I can't even tell you when I used corruption the last time, as it is so insignificant to gameplay that I don't know if I use it at all these days, or if I do I don't remember it.
I agree that not every unit has to have a lot of depth outside of what it does, but I think it should at least have a little bit of it, especially if the unit is not interesting strategywise. Exactly my point. Corruption is right there with the Thor's 250mm cannon. Show nested quote +It's not terrible design. If you only want Broodlords, then making corruptors and turning them into broodlords just means more clicks and more time, than spawning broodlords from eggs directly. Designwise this is completly fine. I don't think that Morphing is bad design, but Morphing from Corruptors, that most of the time won't be even used when you are rushing Brood Lords, is. I don't like the comparison between the SC2 and BW, but for example, Mutalisks in BW are also used for harassment and aren't that good in direct engagements. In the late game, when you are left with Mutalisks, and when there is basically nothing you can do with them anynore, you change them into Guardians so you can use them for harassing expansions etc. How currently SC2 works, you go for Mutalisks/Roaches, then you start making Corruptors just for the sake of Brood Lords, while you sacrifice Mutalisks/Roaches to free the supply for mass Infestors and Brood Lords. Sorry, that is bad design, at least it is in my eyes. But then again, that is because Corruptors aren't used for anything except for anti-air because they don't have anything that affects ground as good as Vikings or Phoenixes. So, if the Corruption is somehow changed, and allows Corruptors to be better units, the design wouldn't be half bad as it is now in my opinion.
Well, I wouldn't say it's bad design. I rather think that it is really hard to find the right unit to morph BLs from. For example, if you put it on mutalisks, this would be really big buff for mutalisk play, as once mutas become less efficient, you just morph broodlords from them. With the "12muta BW-limit", this is way better than in SC2 with mass muta into mass BL or BL/muta. It would basically force the game to offer air-to-air counters to mutalisks, so that if you encounter mutas, you can also use the same units to encounter broodlords. And not only there would be the need for such units, P/T would be forced to build them against mutalisk play. (nerfing either Broods or Mutas being another option)
I don't no, but I think in terms of balancing mutalisks and corruptors and broodlords, it is at least easier to put broodlords on corruptors, though I agree that with the state the corruptor is in, it is still not a very interesting choice.
I think it would be best if the groundsuperiority broodlord morphed from a flying unit, which already was mainly used for antiground combat purposes, not a harass unit like the mutalisk that forces turtle play (which the broodlord is good against) nor a flying unit that has not really a purpose outside of protecting broodlords, after you morphed them into broodlords.
|
On October 04 2012 22:03 Ramiz1989 wrote:
That would work only if the Creep Spread ability would be as good as from the Creep Tower(Nydus Worm evolution that will be in the campaign), because people don't use Overlords for Creep Spread at all, they use Creep Tumors, since they cost only energy, and you don't risk to lose the Overlord.
If anything, Overseer would be used less.
Yeah that seems like a reasonable thing, the improved creep spreading that is. We would need some sort of incentive to use the new [overseer]. I guess the changeling isn't incentive enough. Swapping the creep drop ability was an example obviously, even a total remake of a morphed overlord of some sorts would be nice.
The only problem I can see surfacing immediately is the whole supply problem. It can't be an offensive unit as it basically cost 0 supply and even add to it. Unless you solve it with a cut down in supply added when morphing it (meaning you lose supply). But it would still be problematic and a bitch to balance I think...
EDIT: Formatting
|
On October 05 2012 00:05 TheResidentEvil wrote:
Colossi have the same "boring" that the corrupter has. The reason they aren't changing corruptors is because they aren't changing colossus. At least if you make corruptors, you will eventually get broods anyway. if I make colossus and you make corrupters..then my colossus are just junk.
we don't know whether they change either. We will find out in a few weeks when they change the WoL units.
And Corruptors aren't good enough to turn colossi into "junk". Vikings aren't good enough for that, and Corruptor vs Colossus is even worse, because you will always take stalkerfire, if you want to combat them.
They are a healthy addition if Colossi are being used and they limit the amount of Colossi a Protoss can make, but in the end you need Broodlords to counter Colossusbased play outside of timingpushes.
Also it's a bad argument to say, X is boring, so Y should be boring as well.
Colossi should be more microable (faster fire animation, faster turning rate) and be less powerful on a-move, similarily corruptors. HotS beta gives blizzard the option to change such things without messing with balance/gameplay too much. Just make it so that they are a little weaker on 1a and a little stronger when controlled.
|
On October 04 2012 23:59 Big J wrote:
What is not fine is that the corruptor has no "natural" micro potential (not faster than other air units, not higher ranged) and basically no ability micro. You use corruption (or you don't because the difference isn't gamedeciding most of the time) when you can and simply on the biggest units you can click on and the effect isn't influencial enough to really provoke any micro from corruptors (like you have to focus corrupted units, else they are inefficient) nor from their opponents (like you have to get out of range with corrupted units asap, or they will go down way to easily).
As a Master Zerg, I can't even tell you when I used corruption the last time, as it is so insignificant to gameplay that I don't know if I use it at all these days, or if I do I don't remember it.
I agree that not every unit has to have a lot of depth outside of what it does, but I think it should at least have a little bit of it, especially if the unit is not interesting strategywise.
So about the corruptor... Obviously just a brain fart, but:
Give it Overseer's contaminate spell (with a massive cooldown/energy cost) and try to just do something else with the overlord and the whole observer problematique?
I feel that there could be something useful in there somewhere. Even a single target slow only (e.g. entangle, but for one unit) from the corruptor (or even from the overseer as a swap) ...?
|
Corrupters are flying castles of death and Overseers are free units. What more could you want? Lame, or boring? So what, they fill their roles and quite nicely I might add.
Overseers fill their role greatly, especially with the Changeling.
Corrupters are so difficult to take down.
|
I remember early WoL build where Corruptor was turning dead enemies into attacking units. That's why it was named Corruptor anyway. It's a shame Blizzard no longer tries to make this unit more enjoyable.
|
On October 05 2012 01:50 Indolent wrote:
I remember early WoL build where Corruptor was turning dead enemies into attacking units. That's why it was named Corruptor anyway. It's a shame Blizzard no longer tries to make this unit more enjoyable.
Yes, for me, that was the best design, at least it was very interesting and cool, but I think that it would create a lot of mess... I mean, just think about the Infestors, Corruptors and Brood Lords, it would be a lot harder to deal against. No that you have tons of Infested Marines and Brood Lings, but now whenever your Viking dies, it turns into immobile Zerg turret that is flying. It would be free units galore(like it isn't now...) and it would be very hard to stop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
