EPTOP - pay more attention to attack speed and how all units actually work; understanding how all these things, as well as all the things other mention interact is vital to making a good design.
Terran Identity: Damage and Supply - Page 6
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
OP - pay more attention to attack speed and how all units actually work; understanding how all these things, as well as all the things other mention interact is vital to making a good design. | ||
|
SCRK
Netherlands17 Posts
In conclusion, this will make the tank better at the pro level, but this is a giant nerf to the lower levels of play where the amount of micro needed is not (yet) present. The rest of the changes are pretty good, though, and I think they'll make Terran more fun to play. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On October 17 2012 02:10 zlefin wrote: ok jerm, you just don't get it, its' far harder to competently balance a game when you don't understand how the underlying game works. your poor attitude merely demonstrates needless belligerence; and the damage dones't vary frmo 1 to 33 on a firebat, you're just a noob who can't accept that you don't know the game nearly as well as you think you do. i shan't bother arguing with you anymore, since i've proven you don't know the game that well in detail, and you can't track the arguments properly. OP - pay more attention to attack speed and how all units actually work; understanding how all these things, as well as all the things other mention interact is vital to making a good design. If my cussing offends you, too bad. Welcome to the fucking internet, bitch. You can act all haughty if you want, but the point is YOU aren't seeing the forest through the trees. Just tell me how a 5% DPS increase for the Zealots is even relevant when they clearly perform less well, especially when considering the Marine, the unit you're using to justify this very same DPS increase. Same goes for the muta. Prove the relevance of your numbers, then you will actually have a point. Until then, you're just rambling. | ||
|
Jollygoody
Sweden6 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10551 Posts
On October 17 2012 02:10 zlefin wrote: ok jerm, you just don't get it, its' far harder to competently balance a game when you don't understand how the underlying game works. your poor attitude merely demonstrates needless belligerence; and the damage dones't vary frmo 1 to 33 on a firebat, you're just a noob who can't accept that you don't know the game nearly as well as you think you do. i shan't bother arguing with you anymore, since i've proven you don't know the game that well in detail, and you can't track the arguments properly. OP - pay more attention to attack speed and how all units actually work; understanding how all these things, as well as all the things other mention interact is vital to making a good design. While his numbers are (probably) wrong, his points are right. | ||
|
Killcycle
United States170 Posts
Now, it all sounds great in theory, but I bet Sc2 sounded just as good on paper before release. For that (probably obvious) reason, I'm really interested in seeing the custom map with these changes. My other concern with a custom map like this is that it ignores the principle of unit testing. It's hard to discern the effects of each unit when you have so many changes in one place. While this will eventually yield results given enough games, I think it may be in the best interest of the map to include a pre-match GUI set-up allowing the toggling of specific units, between two states - "Original" (as they are now), and "Modified". Maybe not even in the published map, but the one that you and your testers use. This will let you play with individual units and get a real-game feel for what each unit contributes or doesn't, relative to other units. Perhaps this is just the way I'd go about it, being a (prospective) programmer; just a suggestion.  Either way, this is awesome thought food. Well done. Edit: Will that custom map be available for us non-beta players, or will it be strictly available on HOTS beta? | ||
|
ItWhoSpeaks
United States362 Posts
On October 17 2012 13:49 Killcycle wrote: ItWhoSpeaks, these three threads have really been about the best whole sets of balance changes I've seen. Your reasoning is solid, you give meaningful insight for each change, and really make it shine from a game design standpoint. I especially like how your changes, while sometimes drastic, try to stay relatively close to our current build; you shuffle some things around, but really there are only one or two new units. This, if nothing else, is probably the best way to have Blizzard listen, and to get players interested in this. Now, it all sounds great in theory, but I bet Sc2 sounded just as good on paper before release. For that (probably obvious) reason, I'm really interested in seeing the custom map with these changes. My other concern with a custom map like this is that it ignores the principle of unit testing. It's hard to discern the effects of each unit when you have so many changes in one place. While this will eventually yield results given enough games, I think it may be in the best interest of the map to include a pre-match GUI set-up allowing the toggling of specific units, between two states - "Original" (as they are now), and "Modified". Maybe not even in the published map, but the one that you and your testers use. This will let you play with individual units and get a real-game feel for what each unit contributes or doesn't, relative to other units. Perhaps this is just the way I'd go about it, being a (prospective) programmer; just a suggestion. Either way, this is awesome thought food. Well done. Edit: Will that custom map be available for us non-beta players, or will it be strictly available on HOTS beta? 1. It is important to build on the foundations of SC2 rather than throwing everything away to chase a past that will not return. Our focus as a community should be forward. This is what I (and I hope the community) fight(s) for. 2.It does sound good in theory, but that is only theory, the One Voice PTR will be essential in separating good ideas from bad. And I am sure that I produced both. 3.There will be two maps for the One Voice project. The first will be a PTR map on Ohanna (unless anyone has other suggestions for maps that encourage low tier unit play.) with some of the changes (Toss swaps, Zerg Swap and new Fungal, and rebooted Terran Mech.) There will be HotS units unless otherwise stated by Blizzard, since we are not seeking to Copy the HotS experience. I feel ok about this. The second will be a dev map unit tester where you can turn on and off the various (each change set is a toggle) unit changes and test dynamics between WoL and One Voice. This hopefully will provide the best of both worlds without making it hard for people to get involved in. Thanks for the input! 4. The custom map will be available to all WoL players. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10551 Posts
To get into detail of your points... You write: The Marauder presents elegant design solution to the Starcraft 1 bio problem of melting to AOE + Shield Upgrade for MarinesIt's not an "elegant solution" it's the contrary---> "Bio is melting to AE, let's give them a fat meatball that survives AE and a general HP upgrade... Hurrdurr derp." It is not a well tought out answer to SC1's "problem", it's the answer a 5 year old would give you (my units are dieing fast, what should we do: WE MAKE EM STRONGER!!!)... Your suggestion: OUT: Anti-micro 50% slow. IN: It now provides a static -1 armor reduction to targets for 3 seconds, for a max stack of -2 (this debuff cannot make armor go into the negatives). Did you for a second think what this would do to the Lategame? This is basically a "free" +2 upgrade advantage for Terran. You would in essence have 5-3 Marines/Marauders. Your Siegetanksuggestion basically makes him the SC/BW tank.. So much about going forward ^^. Your new Warhound: 140 HP.. May i ask WHY does everything so much HP? You don't like AE, i get it but your basically trying to patch it out. And why does it need Splashdamage? Your purpose is nothing diffrent than a Gholiat with more HP and Splashdamage (which it does not need). Your Thor changes... ROFL.. Yeah, even more HP, even more Armor and decent Speed (you really have a theme going here). I also think that it was weak to Zergligns was a shame and has to be immediatly adressed or what exactly is the extra armor supposed to do, for sure nothing against Mech..... Why this should help against the Deathball is also beyond me, you now got a better Thor, so why wouldn't you build just more Thors because it's.. stronger and faster and reanimates itself? I have another solution for you: Let's give PF's an upgrade so they can walk, that'll break siegelines! Which Siegelines btw? Nearly everytime i see a Siegeline i see a Thor/Tank or Marauder army just walking over it... Your Raven change: Yeah, if this game needs one thing it's more Forcefields... Forcefields that shoot and mess with targeting AI!!!! Want a good change? Give it (or the Ghost) Irradiate. I kinda like your Viking change. I seriously have 0 Idea why you get praised for your suggestions... The only ones that seem decent to me are the Viking and Snipe changes. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
Don't want to quote whole text, but If you don't understand why the Siege Tank change would be a lot better than what we have currently, and that comment "so much about going forward", maybe you shouldn't comment on it? | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10551 Posts
1. It is important to build on the foundations of SC2 rather than throwing everything away to chase a past that will not return. Our focus as a community should be forward. This is what I (and I hope the community) fight(s) for. Overkill is imho extremly important for Tanks an supplycosts in SC2 are near generally to high, a 2 supply siegetank would propably need a nerf to their non-sieged dmg tho (this one is stronger than it was in SC/BW)... Else a really big siegetank army could probably just "drive" to victory. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On October 17 2012 20:06 Velr wrote: No, i like the change. But it's not going "forward", it's making the Siegetank more alike to BW again. I just found it fun in context to this: Overkill is imho extremly important for Tanks an supplycosts in SC2 are near generally to high, a 2 supply siegetank would propably need a nerf to their non-sieged dmg tho (this one is stronger than it was in SC/BW)... Else a really big siegetank army could probably just "drive" to victory. I agree, but when we talk about going "forward", I think it is about better gameplay, and not wanting every single iconic SC BW unit back, Tanks are already here, they just need a little tweaking. And overkill is extremely important, it was the whole point of Siege Tank Lines, and why they were so strong, but also double-edged units with their splash. Lowering their damage and disabling overkill just made Siege Tank into ordinary units. They don't have the counters as they did but they don't deal as much damage as they did for the same reason, so in the end positioning and flanks don't really matter. I am ok with them being 3 supply, they could be 2, but it is not that important change like other two are. | ||
|
HOTcarl
United States102 Posts
ItWhoSpeaks > Blizzard keep us updated! | ||
|
LexKaiba
Ireland23 Posts
| ||
|
CutieBK
Sweden227 Posts
The Viking change would be huge - I've always loved the unit and wished there were more ways to integrate it in early game and massable strategies! | ||
|
fouquet
Canada29 Posts
Change Package #1 Terran Factory: -Widow Mine Seeder: + Show Spoiler + removed unstable payload. Burrow time 2 seconds. When burrowed it seeds a medium area radius 2 (diameter or 4) with 6 burrowed mini widow mines. Mines have a 2 range activation range and each one deals 60 damage to a single target with a small 15 damage splash. Mines are re seeded 10 seconds after detonation. Mines hit air and ground. Mines deactivate when seeder un burrows. With this change the widow mine retains its purpose of passive area denial but has more counter play with a much smaller individual mine activation range it punishes units that dont have detection but is countered by most forms of detection. In all its a technical buff to the widow mine's damage at the cost of utility/range (360 single target damage if all mines are activated) -The Thor: + Show Spoiler + Anti Air attack removed. Basic attack modified to 80+20 to armored (+5/+5 per upgrade) x1 (2.68 second attack cool down) the thor's basic attack has a cool up time of 1 second before firing to prevent hit and run abuse or silly thorship drop micro from being too strong (still effective but the thor has to be on the ground for 1 second to fire) Strike Cannon Ability Replaced with Haywire Missile Strike (still requires research) targeted ability 16 max range 10 min range. Fire a very slow (only slightly faster than seeker missile) missile at an area dealing 120+80 to mechanical in 3 AoE. 30 second cool down Thor Energy Removed THOR IS HERE. The Thor's current role is an awkward anti light air/anti tough ground unit/sort of meat shield that doesn't shine in any of these roles. It is nonviable in TvP due to being countered by high templars (feedback) and its uses in TvZ are to counter mutaballs (and then they get magicboxed) with these changes the Thor is completely pushed into the anti tough unit role by slowing its attack and heavily increasing it's damage. It also furthur adds to it's innate weakness against swarms of lighter units. It also now has a secondary role as a siege breaker (a role blizzard has shown an interest in with the original warhound) due to its new ability Haywire missile strike. This ability has the limitation of 10 minimum range from the thor but has a whopping 16 range max. it also has an anti mechanical damage bonus and can easily be dodged by mobile units. It primary function would be to kill siege tank lines and to soften defensive emplacements. I think this will not only be an effective ability but one that is fun to watch from a spectator standpoint as it's counter play is micro due to its slow missile speed so landing a great haywire strike will be very rewarding. (it can 1 shot tanks) fun fact new thor can 1 shot marauders with full upgardes but cant 1 shot a roach (roaches are still a counter to the thor) -the Warhound: + Show Spoiler + looks like the a mix between the old warhound and viking ground mode with dual missile racks instead of auto cannons this new warhound has 150 hp 1 armor and is classified as armored mechanical ground attack: 5 range 3x4 damage (no bonus) (+1 damage per upgrade) no AoE air attack: 5 range 4x4 damage (+3 to light) (+1/ per upgrade) smaller AoE than the Thor 1.4 seconds/attack for both attacks the warhound is now a ground Valkyrie from brood war. It attacks by launching 4 mini rockets at a target and is specialized against light air units. It's attack is not very strong against ground and non light air targets due to armor being 4x effective but it also inversely gains a large attack bonus from upgrades, making this unit able to take advantage of upgrade advantages in the early/mid game. Fully upgraded a warhound deals 40 damage before armor to light air targets added a 150/150 upgrade to factory tech lab: Cerberus Booster +3 range to warhound air attack This concludes the factory changes. Here are all the factory unit's and their new roles: Hellion/Battle Hellion: mobile anti light ground harassment and AoE Widow Mine Seeder: Passive air and ground area denial + detection forcing Siege Tank: long range AoE anti armor bombardment at cost of immobility. Warhound: mobile anti light air AoE very weak against higher armor values Thor: Slow moving siege breaker and single target ground unit eliminator. Weak against multiple targets. Now the factory has a well rounded arsenal of options. I would even argue that the battle hellion could be removed with these changes (the warhound can block for siege tanks in its stead) Change Package #2 -the Viking: Changed tag from armored to light (both air and ground mode) Visuals modified to reflect light status (less beefy looking especially in ground mode) now countered by: + Show Spoiler + Pheonix new Warhound new anti light Stalker (match up unchanged) unchanged against: + Show Spoiler + zerg capital ships tempest stronger against: + Show Spoiler + other vikings (makes viking wars less binary due to the unit not being its own counter) new anti air immortal (takes half damage) void rays I feel like the viking sound have been a light unit from the start and that there are too many “armored” units in the game as it is. It also is a big buff the the usability of the phoenix in PvT and should promote more interesting air dominance wars in TvT. This change doesn't change much in the TvZ matchup in addition to your viking change (which is awesome) + Show Spoiler + Ground mode attack modified to 6x2 and cool down reduced to .83 this small change makes the ground viking gain +2 dmg per upgrade but also reduces its effectiveness vs armor. To compensate it fires slightly faster resulting in a slight net dps boost. Will also make the viking better at killing workers in ground mode making it a better harasser. And also no longer activates the immortal's hardened shield. let me know what you think :D | ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
A much better way to change the Viking would be to let it move while lifting and landing, increase its ground movement speed, and give it moving shot on the ground. Could also give the landed viking cliff jump, as it already has this function, just in a really awkward non-fluid way that isn't fun to micro. | ||
|
fouquet
Canada29 Posts
On October 19 2012 14:07 ledarsi wrote: On the whole, your post is great. However the Viking being light is a bad idea. It doesn't need to take extra damage to be countered by the warhound you propose. Same for stalkers with +light. It also does change its effectiveness vs zerg, as banelings would obliterate light-type vikings. Furthermore, hellions and reapers would counter landed vikings very hard, which is bad. A much better way to change the Viking would be to let it move while lifting and landing, increase its ground movement speed, and give it moving shot on the ground. Could also give the landed viking cliff jump, as it already has this function, just in a really awkward non-fluid way that isn't fun to micro. i guess the other option would be to make ground form viking non light or armored. i really think air vikings should have the light tag as it opens more more interesting air battles and dynamic air counters (instead of vikings counter vikings, pheonix are useless ect.) it is less about focing the AA warhound to be relavant and more about making pheonix relevant and keeping ItWhoSpeaks, anti light stalker as a mobile counter to vikings. i really like the lift move thing. | ||
|
Goobahfish
Australia71 Posts
A firebat has a base damage of 8. (In the same way a zealot does). With +3 damage upgrades this is 11. It can hit up to 3 targets. Ergo: 33 damage. Likewise vs an Ultralisk... it does like 1 damage. 1-33. Missing DPS does significantly 'colour' comparisons. | ||
|
Goobahfish
Australia71 Posts
The following changes: Protoss: Stronger vs Stalkers, Immortals, Void Rays Weaker vs Phoenix Terran: Stronger vs Viking, Tank, Marauder Weaker vs Reaper, Hellion Zerg: Stronger vs Infestor Weaker vs Baneling I can't really see a problem with any of that. Banelings/Reapers/Hellions can't hit air so who cares. Vikings counter Voids better but suffer against Phoenixes and they are more durable in a lot of circumstances on the ground. Ultimately it doesn't really change too much except using stalkers to protect collossi which would then give Phoenixes more play vs terran I guess. | ||
|
Fencar
United States2694 Posts
On October 20 2012 10:08 Goobahfish wrote: Re: Vikings being light. The following changes: Protoss: Stronger vs Stalkers, Immortals, Void Rays Weaker vs Phoenix Terran: Stronger vs Viking, Tank, Marauder Weaker vs Reaper, Hellion Zerg: Stronger vs Infestor Weaker vs Baneling I can't really see a problem with any of that. Banelings/Reapers/Hellions can't hit air so who cares. Vikings counter Voids better but suffer against Phoenixes and they are more durable in a lot of circumstances on the ground. Ultimately it doesn't really change too much except using stalkers to protect collossi which would then give Phoenixes more play vs terran I guess. I see a problem with Vikings being light as Sky Terran will not be viable unless Ravens are buffed heavily to account for this, as there will be a reliance on turrets (auto and missile) to defend against enemy Air, which does not allow mobility and allows the Terran to get picked apart by a mass expanding Protoss with Tempests to snipe high tech units and hit your economy in the meantime. | ||
| ||
