|
On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast.
No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield.
|
For FF: How about roaches can innately move while burrowed, like infestors? Then remove regen while burrowed, so FF isn't completely useless versus mass roaches. Z can quickly have burrowed movement well before the immortal sentry 2 base happens. It's easier to take a third with the mothership core, anyway.
|
What about splitting forcefield up into 2 different spells, maybe removing hallucination (Adding it to the nexus as a viable scout opportunity?)
First you have spell one,
can only be cast on buildings - Surrounds the building with a forcefield, making it invulnerable to melee attack (Also massive units) and repair.
Possibly needs to reduce the duration or nerfing it to absorbing a certain amount of damage or repair (to make it weaker as a busting tool)
Then you could add some spell to buff your army as well. The second spell could be something to help army combat, just like forcefield does. Im not really sure what would be appropriate here.
Things like
"Hallucinate - creates a hallucination on a unit, this unit deals 100% damage, and all damage done to the cloned unit goes to the hallucination first" Lasts 5 seconds on massive, 15 on everything else. Every unit can only be cloned once
maybe give timewarp to the sentry, theres so many possibilities
I also feel there needs to be a surviveability upgrade for sentries, so they actually do something in the lategame
|
On November 05 2012 11:36 Rassy wrote:• Fungal growth changed from complete root to 40% movement speed slow and 30% attack speed slow. Damage unchanged. Still prevents blink. This feels like a buff to fungal. While this allows your units to somewhat try to escape it at the same time lowers their dps with 30%? When you got fungled your units where at least fighting, now instead of fighting you have to make some attempt to escape with 40% movement speed,(wich wont work against zerg..) fighing with 30% dps reduced does not seem an option. Am specifically thinking about zvz roach infestor engagements here, where people usually dont want to retreat annyway, and the fungal is just extra dps basicly, not sure how this is in other matchups but at first impression this seems like a buff to fungal  .
In 90% of situations I'd take a damage RoF reduction to having my units snared.
Having your units snared means that you'll be chained to death. You can't run behind your siege tanks. Even with lots of FF, if the infestors are in range and you have no colossus, the chain fungal WILL kill your blink stalkers/immortals/sentries (it's not uncommon for infestor fungal to kill ALL sentries because it only takes 3 fungals to kill them).
This is no way is a buff, it's a massive, massive nerf... the potency of fungal relies 100% in it's snare capabilities. RoF reductions means you can fire your first shot, then just retreat before firing again after a longer duration.
I mean hell, ensnare in BW completely cancelled out the 100% RoF stim gave to marines (so halving their RoF) while simultaneously putting on a 50% snare, and the ability was almost never used. Granted, it affected units differently (like having zero effect on goliath RoF wtf), and was significantly harder to use, really it's not as dramatic as you would assume, especially since it's only affecting the units in the fungal range.
I'm thinking that even if you had a 60% reduction in RoF with a 40% reduction movement speed it would still be a notable nerf to what exists now. Think about it... medivacs/warp prisms can still escape, zealots would be infinitely more useful, you could retreat from infestors by utilizing FF (as explained above, you can't right now), vikings could pull back from corrupters and insta split if they're all caught in a single fungal and prevent being chained.... marines would still be moving faster than when normally unstimmed....
While I think FF was designed poorly, I don't think it should be changed at this point. Fungal absolutely positively 100% needs to be changed from a pure utility value of game enjoyment, regardless of balance. Right now it simply isn't fun.... I truly believe the only reason Blizzard won't turn it into a slow from a complete stop-snare is because it would then resemble ensnare from BW too much, and they're really trying to differentiate it from its predecessor.
|
I don't think there is any issue with forcefield. It helps to make protoss units more cost efficient. The entire problem now with the game is Infestors, broodlords, mother ship and collosus. Roaches are actually badly design but forcefield can negate that.
Broodlords are actually not that powerful without Infestors. IMO Zergs can actually still win games without Infestors. I seriously hate facing Zerg, lol, I find Infestors too imba.
|
On November 05 2012 12:54 Zaurus wrote:
I don't think there is any issue with forcefield. It helps to make protoss units more cost efficient. The entire problem now with the game is Infestors, broodlords, mother ship and collosus. Roaches are actually badly design but forcefield can negate that.
Broodlords are actually not that powerful without Infestors. IMO Zergs can actually still win games without Infestors. I seriously hate facing Zerg, lol, I find Infestors too imba.
I think people would agree they *can* win games without infestors (although it would have to completely change the playstyle), but the question is why they ever would, with the exception of trying to throw their opponent off.....
There isn't really an issue with Colossus beyond it's ridiculous ease of use. In terms of actual balance, it's whatever. Only really an issue in PvT lategame where it makes the micro on the Terran side ridiculously harder. But at least it's beatable and not "ok some spell makes it so all my units are doing 0 dmg to you while my units all die."
I remember watching a replay with Select TvZ on Daybreak where a maxed engagement resulted in the Zerg's "units lost tab" not even increasing by FIFTY minerals. The Zerg didn't lose a single unit and Select lost like 50+ supply, only killing broodlings. THAT is fucking stupid (Zerg brought mass queen which infinitely transfused the BL's before the vikings could manage to get the second or third volley off for the killing blow on the single unit...).
I know you're not necessarily disagreeing, I just think the issue is more so with the infestor and infestor only compared to the units you listed.
|
On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield.
Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject.
For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest.
Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that.
If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example.
|
Sigh. Can't believe you didn't even spend the paltry amount of time it would require to realize that your idea of "Fortify" as stated would encourage aggressive pylon/assimilator placement and use that as a weapon. Would be fun to watch but no more balanced or sensible than an idea from a UMS.
|
On November 05 2012 13:32 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield. Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject. For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest. Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that. If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example.
I disagree with your theory on production speed boosts pertaining to Zerg specifically. Whether or not larvae inject provides additional larvae, the Zerg will have the ability to make multiple units at once from larvae that have already spawned. Sure ultras may have a 60s buildtime, but when you're making like 15 at once, you're still "flooding" the battle field. Larve inject merely accelerates the rate at which you can generate said larvae, which building additional hatcheries accomplishes the same thing, just not as well. If additional hatcheries would do the same thing as inject larvae, just at a toned down rate, than it implies that inject larvae would only need to be toned down to be balanced, or the entire concept of Zerg production is flawed rather than it's accelerated production (and we know it's not going to get changed no matter what so w/e).
I don't like how inject larvae works either (4 fucking larvae?!). Since the beta I argued it should be 2 hatch, 3 lair, and 4 at hive and THEN you balance around that, but it's way too late balance wise to try to accomplish that.... .
|
On November 05 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 13:32 Rabiator wrote:On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield. Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject. For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest. Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that. If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example. I disagree with your theory on production speed boosts pertaining to Zerg specifically. Whether or not larvae inject provides additional larvae, the Zerg will have the ability to make multiple units at once from larvae that have already spawned. Sure ultras may have a 60s buildtime, but when you're making like 15 at once, you're still "flooding" the battle field. Larve inject merely accelerates the rate at which you can generate said larvae, which building additional hatcheries accomplishes the same thing, just not as well. If additional hatcheries would do the same thing as inject larvae, just at a toned down rate, than it implies that inject larvae would only need to be toned down to be balanced, or the entire concept of Zerg production is flawed rather than it's accelerated production (and we know it's not going to get changed no matter what so w/e). I don't like how inject larvae works either (4 fucking larvae?!). Since the beta I argued it should be 2 hatch, 3 lair, and 4 at hive and THEN you balance around that, but it's way too late balance wise to try to accomplish that.... .
The difference between BW and SC2 is that hatcheries can produce up to THREE larvae and then stop, but Inject Larvae can "break this limit" and stockpile up to any amount per hatchery. The whole point is that a queen costs less than half the amount of a hatchery and allows this to happen and thus it speeds up the whole process without Zerg needing to build LOTS of hatcheries.
Even fiddling around with the number of larva inject wont help fixing the issue, because it works the same way for all three races. With the MULE and some reactors Terrans can flood the map with Marines and at 7-8 Warp Gates a Protoss can flood the game with lots of their infantry. This is a bad thing, because it puts too much emphasis on scouting and being able to react to the aggression of your opponent. Now for progamers this is easy, but what about casuals? They will be swamped by this burst potential.
So it is best if all of these burst productions are scrapped and the game would be reduced to smaller battles and less production. Expensive units would finally become more important and throwing away your units (because you can remax quicker than the opponent) would be a less acceptable tactic. In smaller battles units die a lot slower and microing the few units will become more important (and thus the battles become more interesting for the viewer and more skill based) compared to just moving blobs of unit clumps in one giant control group.
|
On November 05 2012 12:48 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 11:36 Rassy wrote:• Fungal growth changed from complete root to 40% movement speed slow and 30% attack speed slow. Damage unchanged. Still prevents blink. This feels like a buff to fungal. While this allows your units to somewhat try to escape it at the same time lowers their dps with 30%? When you got fungled your units where at least fighting, now instead of fighting you have to make some attempt to escape with 40% movement speed,(wich wont work against zerg..) fighing with 30% dps reduced does not seem an option. Am specifically thinking about zvz roach infestor engagements here, where people usually dont want to retreat annyway, and the fungal is just extra dps basicly, not sure how this is in other matchups but at first impression this seems like a buff to fungal . In 90% of situations I'd take a damage RoF reduction to having my units snared. Having your units snared means that you'll be chained to death. You can't run behind your siege tanks. Even with lots of FF, if the infestors are in range and you have no colossus, the chain fungal WILL kill your blink stalkers/immortals/sentries (it's not uncommon for infestor fungal to kill ALL sentries because it only takes 3 fungals to kill them). This is no way is a buff, it's a massive, massive nerf... the potency of fungal relies 100% in it's snare capabilities. RoF reductions means you can fire your first shot, then just retreat before firing again after a longer duration. I mean hell, ensnare in BW completely cancelled out the 100% RoF stim gave to marines (so halving their RoF) while simultaneously putting on a 50% snare, and the ability was almost never used. Granted, it affected units differently (like having zero effect on goliath RoF wtf), and was significantly harder to use, really it's not as dramatic as you would assume, especially since it's only affecting the units in the fungal range. I'm thinking that even if you had a 60% reduction in RoF with a 40% reduction movement speed it would still be a notable nerf to what exists now. Think about it... medivacs/warp prisms can still escape, zealots would be infinitely more useful, you could retreat from infestors by utilizing FF (as explained above, you can't right now), vikings could pull back from corrupters and insta split if they're all caught in a single fungal and prevent being chained.... marines would still be moving faster than when normally unstimmed.... While I think FF was designed poorly, I don't think it should be changed at this point. Fungal absolutely positively 100% needs to be changed from a pure utility value of game enjoyment, regardless of balance. Right now it simply isn't fun.... I truly believe the only reason Blizzard won't turn it into a slow from a complete stop-snare is because it would then resemble ensnare from BW too much, and they're really trying to differentiate it from its predecessor.
Make a custom map would probly take 10 minutes. Try it out and come back and let us know ^^
|
On November 05 2012 14:38 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 05 2012 13:32 Rabiator wrote:On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield. Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject. For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest. Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that. If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example. I disagree with your theory on production speed boosts pertaining to Zerg specifically. Whether or not larvae inject provides additional larvae, the Zerg will have the ability to make multiple units at once from larvae that have already spawned. Sure ultras may have a 60s buildtime, but when you're making like 15 at once, you're still "flooding" the battle field. Larve inject merely accelerates the rate at which you can generate said larvae, which building additional hatcheries accomplishes the same thing, just not as well. If additional hatcheries would do the same thing as inject larvae, just at a toned down rate, than it implies that inject larvae would only need to be toned down to be balanced, or the entire concept of Zerg production is flawed rather than it's accelerated production (and we know it's not going to get changed no matter what so w/e). I don't like how inject larvae works either (4 fucking larvae?!). Since the beta I argued it should be 2 hatch, 3 lair, and 4 at hive and THEN you balance around that, but it's way too late balance wise to try to accomplish that.... . The difference between BW and SC2 is that hatcheries can produce up to THREE larvae and then stop, but Inject Larvae can "break this limit" and stockpile up to any amount per hatchery. The whole point is that a queen costs less than half the amount of a hatchery and allows this to happen and thus it speeds up the whole process without Zerg needing to build LOTS of hatcheries. Even fiddling around with the number of larva inject wont help fixing the issue, because it works the same way for all three races. With the MULE and some reactors Terrans can flood the map with Marines and at 7-8 Warp Gates a Protoss can flood the game with lots of their infantry. This is a bad thing, because it puts too much emphasis on scouting and being able to react to the aggression of your opponent. Now for progamers this is easy, but what about casuals? They will be swamped by this burst potential. So it is best if all of these burst productions are scrapped and the game would be reduced to smaller battles and less production. Expensive units would finally become more important and throwing away your units (because you can remax quicker than the opponent) would be a less acceptable tactic. In smaller battles units die a lot slower and microing the few units will become more important (and thus the battles become more interesting for the viewer and more skill based) compared to just moving blobs of unit clumps in one giant control group.
you can only have 19 larva per hatch max
I actually think the game currently is ok with all these so called "burst" production other than Warp gate.
This is due to the fact that Toss can remax ANYWHERE way too quickly and due to ball effect, it will just crush any small number of remax.
We don't really see just big ball vs big ball until max, there are little skirmish in most games before it gets to late game.
The little skirmish in mid game tries to slow economy down, pull the opponent army out of position etc are fun to watch.
Then max deathball battle has its own micro positioning compared to the small skirmishes micro.
Biggest problem is that the ball vs ball battle lasts too short with little to see, you can't run away easily due to fungal, FF, stim etc.
Then the game is almost always decided by that one single ball engagement, no comeback chance whatsoever.
That's why I think fixing infestors bl deathball is not important at all. We had similar problem before where Protoss deathball was almost unbeatable and zerg had to trade extremely poorly with roach hydra corruptors and usually just lose to a quick warp in mass gateway units.
We need something that allows more comeback while having ball battles
|
On November 05 2012 14:38 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 05 2012 13:32 Rabiator wrote:On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield. Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject. For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest. Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that. If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example. I disagree with your theory on production speed boosts pertaining to Zerg specifically. Whether or not larvae inject provides additional larvae, the Zerg will have the ability to make multiple units at once from larvae that have already spawned. Sure ultras may have a 60s buildtime, but when you're making like 15 at once, you're still "flooding" the battle field. Larve inject merely accelerates the rate at which you can generate said larvae, which building additional hatcheries accomplishes the same thing, just not as well. If additional hatcheries would do the same thing as inject larvae, just at a toned down rate, than it implies that inject larvae would only need to be toned down to be balanced, or the entire concept of Zerg production is flawed rather than it's accelerated production (and we know it's not going to get changed no matter what so w/e). I don't like how inject larvae works either (4 fucking larvae?!). Since the beta I argued it should be 2 hatch, 3 lair, and 4 at hive and THEN you balance around that, but it's way too late balance wise to try to accomplish that.... . The difference between BW and SC2 is that hatcheries can produce up to THREE larvae and then stop, but Inject Larvae can "break this limit" and stockpile up to any amount per hatchery. The whole point is that a queen costs less than half the amount of a hatchery and allows this to happen and thus it speeds up the whole process without Zerg needing to build LOTS of hatcheries. Even fiddling around with the number of larva inject wont help fixing the issue, because it works the same way for all three races. With the MULE and some reactors Terrans can flood the map with Marines and at 7-8 Warp Gates a Protoss can flood the game with lots of their infantry. This is a bad thing, because it puts too much emphasis on scouting and being able to react to the aggression of your opponent. Now for progamers this is easy, but what about casuals? They will be swamped by this burst potential. So it is best if all of these burst productions are scrapped and the game would be reduced to smaller battles and less production. Expensive units would finally become more important and throwing away your units (because you can remax quicker than the opponent) would be a less acceptable tactic. In smaller battles units die a lot slower and microing the few units will become more important (and thus the battles become more interesting for the viewer and more skill based) compared to just moving blobs of unit clumps in one giant control group.
Hmm.... I definitely agree with your point on maximum larvae capacity, although that could as well always be an adjustable number, no? As of right now, it does have a max capacity, but at a ridiculous value of like... 19 or something?
Your concern about Terran isn't really relevant imo. Mules increase mineral mining, sure. But I don't really see how "Terran can have a higher mining income now" be an issue to what you're saying. As it averages around 4 extra workers of mining time overall (although the mining income is front-loaded admittedly contributing to your issue with it), it's really not some "holy shit this is way excessive." Marines don't really seem to flood the field in some "I can't keep up with this way." But I guess that's subjective.
Reactors are questionably relevant as well. From my perspective, their greatest utility is not their increased production capacity, but their ability to save building space (which is a different root cause, but still contributes to your issue of production ability). Because really, in the grand scheme of things, there isn't a huge massive difference between spending 50/50 on a reactor or an additional 150 minerals on another rax. Sure, the reactor in many cases is beneficial, but the actual lessor alternative isn't very significant, besides building space. Oh, and the extreme convenience you get of course from being able to build them when supply blocked.... but that's irrelevant and much more pertinent to me personally  .
Warpgates are flawed only in their early game because of the single round of burst potential you mention exactly, and I really despise how it works, but I also fail to see how this is in any way breaking the game or causing major issues. It's poorly designed, sure, but the net impact on the game really that profound, at least in any manner that causes for a complete ground up rehaul of the mechanic.
What do you mean that casuals will be swamped? That they can't handle it? I don't really see their macro being terrible as a counterargument for the sole reason they will be matched up against similar players on the ladder (50% win ratio over time). I may need this argument to be fleshed out a little more....
As it is, the challenge of microing these large blobs as is, is what creates the skill gaps. Sure you might say you can afford to throw units away, but those that are the top *won't* throw them away. They'll still micro them for maximum utility, even if the gain is only marginal. I don't see how your arguments against burst potential result in the conclusion that if we remove them, the game becomes somehow more interesting (for example, the spectator community in WC3 is pitiful compared to that of SC:BW. I personally utterly hated watching the micro battles in WC3 and thought it was absolutely an awful quality).
It seems to me your issue lies almost soley in the fact that the burst potential creates the ability to create extremely powerful timing attacks if not scouted, and at the same time reduce the available amount of time to even scout these attacks since you don't have to start pumping out units as early. Which is true, and this is an issue, but I don't see how it results in anything else you mentioned such as deathballs.... etc. More units to me means more opportunities for minute tactical maneauvers, runbys, flanks, counters, drops, etc. .
Sorry for the excessively long post. My fault .
|
Proposed sentry changes:
Remove forcefield
Guardian shield. As is but protect units from fungal and EMP
Add shield battery function - like sc/bw right clicking a unit on sentry recharges the shield on the unit
I hate three units in this game. Sentries, ghosts and infestors. In my view, as a protoss player, this along with removing fungal 100% root fix all I hate about them. The shield function would preserve sentries as a backbone unit and properly buff protoss units early game compensating for the loss of ff. Balancing could be done via starting energy/shield per energy/max energy/regeneration levels.
Not proposed but funny:
One funny idea I had was if the guardian shield would add +1 range on all units. Quite sure +1 range zealots would be completely imbalanced tho (lightsaber length on those psi blades  ).
|
A slow is just a weaker root; its purpose is the same: to limit micro. This is bad. Instead, it should force micro. Remove the root from Fungal and add a status effect that makes units take additional damage. Like, a lot of additional damage. 25-50 percent more. This way, fungaled units have to be microed to the back or they will be demolished. This forces micro instead of removing. More micro, more skill.
For Force Field, change the range to self, like the Guardian Shield. It forms around the sentry, pushing units away and making the sentry immobile, invincible and unable to attack - like its own personal stasis field. Accompanied by a slight radius increase, this would still allow the Sentry to be used for blocking ramps and those types of defensive maneuvers, but would stop it from limiting micro and control. Additionally, add another aura spell that increases friendly unit movement speed. This would facilitate escapes and retreats that the current Force Field helps with. Call it "Energon Field" because that sounds good.
The big problem with Vortex is the exit: units exit all clumped up. So, change that: make units leave the vortex in the same position that the entered. Yes, this is functionally the same as Stasis Field, but it retains the "coolness" factor of Vortex.
While we're on the subject...
Gravitron beam: This is a stun. Stun's are also bad. Make it an AoE spell. Units in the field can be hit by air attacks. Additionally, I think it should have one of two effects: either ground units in the field cannot attack air or air units in the field cannot be hit by units on the ground.
Concussive shells: Again, slows are bad. Change this to a castable ability with a small knockback. This would allow concussive shells to fill its role delaying enemies for a short time without limiting the control and micro that a player can perform.
250mm Strike Cannons: Just ax it. Seriously, no one uses this. If it must be replaced, I think an AoE air attack could be helpful, to actually make the Thor viable against auto-spread Mutalisks. Or give the Thor a self targeting Defensive Matrix to give it added survivability against Tanks, Immortals and Brood Lords.
There you go: these are all my ideas for dealing with micro-limiting abilities.
|
Quote:
+ Show Spoiler +On November 05 2012 14:55 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 14:38 Rabiator wrote:On November 05 2012 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 05 2012 13:32 Rabiator wrote:On November 05 2012 12:28 Wingblade wrote:On November 04 2012 08:06 anon734912 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:13 Gfire wrote:
Does anyone think it would work to make FFs unable to be placed on top of enemy units, and your own units have to move out of the way first? The same mechanic as placing a building, basically. I really like this idea. It would be impossible to use it to split your opponent's army, but a good player will be able to cast FFs in the gaps. It can still be used defensively and to sculpt the battlefield to your desired shape. Ideally, I'd like to see it take up 2x2 build square and require 1 empty square at the target point to be allowed to be cast. No. Are you trying to break PvZ and PvP? How does Protoss stop roaches if we can't split the roach group up? How do I stop 4gates if the opponent is running up against the last forcefield. Thats why the game needs drastic changes to its general mechanics. The problem isnt the Roach itself but rather the ability of Zerg to FLOOD the battlefield with them after a certain point. Thus the real culprit is their production speed boost ... larva inject. For a while now I have wondered why the three races have gotten more or less limited production speed boosts, because that weighs their respective units differently. In the case of Terrans for example the Siege Tank is hard to reproduce, because it cant be made with a reactor. This is one factor why mech isnt as viable as bio IMO. Zerg have gotten the most powerful production speed boost, because they can produce anything they want with the larvae they have and this is supposed to be balanced by the fact that they cant produce both drones and units in the beginning. Well it doesnt balance it in the slightest. Warp Gate and Inject Larvae have produced many problems in the past, just as mass-Marine production, but sadly people have laid the blame on the unit instead of the mass-production capability. The solution is quite easy: Just get rid of all production speed boosts and also economic speed boosts (whining about the MULE has been popular for a while, right?) and rebalance the game around that. If Blizzard was fixing the game from this end they could also fix the "infantry density problem" (a.k.a. the deathball) by making units spread out as a normal state and only clump up through micro, limit the unit selection to 12 and readjust AoE damage. This would also allow the more expensive Stalkers to survive longer against cheaper Marines and Roaches for example. I disagree with your theory on production speed boosts pertaining to Zerg specifically. Whether or not larvae inject provides additional larvae, the Zerg will have the ability to make multiple units at once from larvae that have already spawned. Sure ultras may have a 60s buildtime, but when you're making like 15 at once, you're still "flooding" the battle field. Larve inject merely accelerates the rate at which you can generate said larvae, which building additional hatcheries accomplishes the same thing, just not as well. If additional hatcheries would do the same thing as inject larvae, just at a toned down rate, than it implies that inject larvae would only need to be toned down to be balanced, or the entire concept of Zerg production is flawed rather than it's accelerated production (and we know it's not going to get changed no matter what so w/e). I don't like how inject larvae works either (4 fucking larvae?!). Since the beta I argued it should be 2 hatch, 3 lair, and 4 at hive and THEN you balance around that, but it's way too late balance wise to try to accomplish that.... . The difference between BW and SC2 is that hatcheries can produce up to THREE larvae and then stop, but Inject Larvae can "break this limit" and stockpile up to any amount per hatchery. The whole point is that a queen costs less than half the amount of a hatchery and allows this to happen and thus it speeds up the whole process without Zerg needing to build LOTS of hatcheries. Even fiddling around with the number of larva inject wont help fixing the issue, because it works the same way for all three races. With the MULE and some reactors Terrans can flood the map with Marines and at 7-8 Warp Gates a Protoss can flood the game with lots of their infantry. This is a bad thing, because it puts too much emphasis on scouting and being able to react to the aggression of your opponent. Now for progamers this is easy, but what about casuals? They will be swamped by this burst potential. So it is best if all of these burst productions are scrapped and the game would be reduced to smaller battles and less production. Expensive units would finally become more important and throwing away your units (because you can remax quicker than the opponent) would be a less acceptable tactic. In smaller battles units die a lot slower and microing the few units will become more important (and thus the battles become more interesting for the viewer and more skill based) compared to just moving blobs of unit clumps in one giant control group. Hmm.... I definitely agree with your point on maximum larvae capacity, although that could as well always be an adjustable number, no? As of right now, it does have a max capacity, but at a ridiculous value of like... 19 or something? Your concern about Terran isn't really relevant imo. Mules increase mineral mining, sure. But I don't really see how "Terran can have a higher mining income now" be an issue to what you're saying. As it averages around 4 extra workers of mining time overall (although the mining income is front-loaded admittedly contributing to your issue with it), it's really not some "holy shit this is way excessive." Marines don't really seem to flood the field in some "I can't keep up with this way." But I guess that's subjective. Reactors are questionably relevant as well. From my perspective, their greatest utility is not their increased production capacity, but their ability to save building space (which is a different root cause, but still contributes to your issue of production ability). Because really, in the grand scheme of things, there isn't a huge massive difference between spending 50/50 on a reactor or an additional 150 minerals on another rax. Sure, the reactor in many cases is beneficial, but the actual lessor alternative isn't very significant, besides building space. Oh, and the extreme convenience you get of course from being able to build them when supply blocked.... but that's irrelevant and much more pertinent to me personally . Warpgates are flawed only in their early game because of the single round of burst potential you mention exactly, and I really despise how it works, but I also fail to see how this is in any way breaking the game or causing major issues. It's poorly designed, sure, but the net impact on the game really that profound, at least in any manner that causes for a complete ground up rehaul of the mechanic. What do you mean that casuals will be swamped? That they can't handle it? I don't really see their macro being terrible as a counterargument for the sole reason they will be matched up against similar players on the ladder (50% win ratio over time). I may need this argument to be fleshed out a little more.... As it is, the challenge of microing these large blobs as is, is what creates the skill gaps. Sure you might say you can afford to throw units away, but those that are the top *won't* throw them away. They'll still micro them for maximum utility, even if the gain is only marginal. I don't see how your arguments against burst potential result in the conclusion that if we remove them, the game becomes somehow more interesting (for example, the spectator community in WC3 is pitiful compared to that of SC:BW. I personally utterly hated watching the micro battles in WC3 and thought it was absolutely an awful quality). It seems to me your issue lies almost soley in the fact that the burst potential creates the ability to create extremely powerful timing attacks if not scouted, and at the same time reduce the available amount of time to even scout these attacks since you don't have to start pumping out units as early. Which is true, and this is an issue, but I don't see how it results in anything else you mentioned such as deathballs.... etc. More units to me means more opportunities for minute tactical maneauvers, runbys, flanks, counters, drops, etc. . Sorry for the excessively long post. My fault .
The problem of the production speed boosts for the three races is that they "kick in" at different times and thus generate an advantage for each race at the respective time. That's why reactore Hellions are so dangerous, because you will have a large number of them roasting Drones without sufficient defenses for the Zerg (unless he sacrificed economy to get some) and thats why 4-gate and any early Warp Gate builds are so dangerous as well. IMO it is better to not have these imbalances in the game, because they only do one thing: multiply the imbalances of the respective units.
Having specific "timings" for attacks isnt so bad when you have figured it out, but what happens when Blizzard adds in new units? Everything has to be rebalanced again in a much more serious way than it would be needed if these new units would only come out slowly. Massive numbers of Widow Mines or Battle Hellions are going to affect the balance a lot, but the same is going to be true for new Zerg stuff.
Terrans having a higher income does increase their production capabilities by the simple fact that the 270 minerals from a MULE are resources which wouldnt be there otherwise and which allow the Terran to build an additional barracks plus some Marines. You could also have another CC plus Orbital for two MULEs ... so a boost for the economy of the Terran actually increases their production capacity. The main reason why the MULE should be scrapped is that inject larva and chronoboost are the economic speed boosts for Zerg and Protoss and would be removed since they also function as unit production boosts and if those races cant have any economic boosts then Terrans shouldnt have one either.
As a casual you play your game at maybe half the speed of a progamer and if one of them decides "its time to attack" they simply switch from producing Drones to fully producing units instead or just making a ton of Warp Gates and a proxy pylon and then heading into their opponents base. The defneder then is swamped by a huge amount of units he wasnt really prepared for, because his lack of scouting gave him no warning. Thus the game is "too fast" for casuals from a production standpoint IMO.
More units sadly dont mean "more opportunities for minute tactical maneuvers" since you have too many units to control. All that means is "bigger blobs" and more "large scale micro" (movement/positioning of blobs). "More units" doesnt equate to "better battles"; the opposite is true IMO, because of the "fish swarm effect" you cant really see the individual units anymore. More units in the current state of the game really only mean a bigger blob since the deathball is the most efficient way to win ... "bring overwhelming force against a part of your opponents army and you will lose less than they do". Simple and sad logic. Sadly the race which is supposed to win by reproducing quicker than the others has also gotten/will get the most ridiculous number of free unit generators imaginable.
Forcefield, Fungal and Vortex are AoE effects which should have been nerfed alongside Siege Tank AoE damage. They arent really fun but they are crutches to make the game with its tight clumps of units work. I think Banelings should be added to that list as well, because the instant damage stacks too well against buildings and thus an "over time damage" would be much better. That one could be fixed by reducing the "density" of the Baneling units though and increasing the AoE damage again.
|
I was thinking about it, and while numbers would need to be completely retweaked for balance, what do people think about fungal completely killing all useable and passive abilities? You could have it also keep its damage and change it to a slow (at whatever percent you want depending on how potent this ability actually ends up being in gameplay. If it has little effect, make it like an 80% slow, if it has a ridiculous effect, change it to like a 30% slow or even no slow if it's way more powerful than I anticipate). Depending on how much you want to limit the slow, you could also implement a RoF decrease, although this might get too "complicated" for Blizzard.
This is abilities I envision it affecting, copied and pasted from another thread I just posted in
+ Show Spoiler +Terran:
- SCVs can't mine, repair, or make buildings
- Marines can't stim
- Marauders can't stim and conc no longer applies
- Medivacs no longer can heal or unload
- Ghosts can't cloak (I usually cloak as soon as fungaled b/c as soon as it wears off, it activates, forcing an immediate chain fungal and making it so you don't have to wait for fungal to wear off to use it), EMP, or Nuke
- Siege tanks cannot Siege or Unsiege (could be SUPER powerful, but still better than current imo)
- Thors can't strike cannon (OH NOES)
- Vikings can't land (although I think this is already accomplished?)
- Ravens can't use autoturret, PDD, or seeker AND detection is cancelled
- Banshees can't cloak (once again not too significant but I ALWAYS cloak my fungaled shees preemptively and it helps far more than one would imagine)
- BC's cannot use Yamato
Protoss:
- Probes can't mine or make buildings
- Zealots can't charge (although at least they can still move unlike the current fungal which renders them almost useless)
- Stalkers can't blink (doesn't change :o)
- Sentries can't cast Guardian Shield/Force Field
- Dark Templar not only lose cloaking but can't morph into an Archon (although I guess they couldn't already)
- High Templar can't feedback, storm, or morph into Archon
- Observer loses detection ability on top of cloak
- Warp Prism can't switch modes, can't unload, (and if desirable, a fungal immediately cancels all warping in units from a Warp Prism!)
- Immortal hardened shields deactivated (up to debate...)
- Colossi can't walk up/down cliffs (although I don't know if this is doable especially if already on a cliff)
- Phoenix can't lift
- Void rays decharge to first phase
- Carriers can't remake interceptors (and maybe even can't launch if not already out? Although who wants to nerf them really....)
- Mothership can't cast vortex or recall
Zerg: (Well this part is kinda unnecessary but why not)
- Drones can't mine or morph into buildings
- No unit can burrow, although it's already like this
- If eggs are burrowed, perhaps their build time stops counting for 4 seconds? :o
- Stops zergling --> baneling timer from continuing during morph, detonated banelings lose their bonus dmg vs buildings
- Queens can't lay tumors, inject, or transfuse
- Overseers lose detection ability, overlords can no longer load/unload nor drop creep
- Roaches don't heal when burrowed, still can't unburrow (which would actually increase fungals potency)
- Hydra extra speed bonus diminished on creep, only moves as fast as the normal speed bonus gives Zerg units, and then movement speed is reduced based on that number (although possibly a totally unnecessary change)
- Muta glave shot no longer bounces
- Corrupters can't corrupt
- Other infestors can't cast infested Terrans, fungal, or NP (although this might cause the game to revolve around who can get a fungal on other infestors which might be dumb....)
- Corrupters can't morph into BL's, those midmorphing have their timer delayed
- BL reload is effectively delayed as the additional broodling fails to spawn to be thrown at the enemy, although it can attack with any already pregenerated broodlings
- Technically I guess it should negate ultras frenzied ability, although I'm not sure how that would work since frenzy is supposed to make it immune from snares.... well it would cancel burrow charge in HOTS!
On November 05 2012 14:58 M.R. McThundercrotch wrote:
A slow is just a weaker root; its purpose is the same: to limit micro. This is bad. Instead, it should force micro. Remove the root from Fungal and add a status effect that makes units take additional damage. Like, a lot of additional damage. 25-50 percent more. This way, fungaled units have to be microed to the back or they will be demolished. This forces micro instead of removing. More micro, more skill.
For Force Field, change the range to self, like the Guardian Shield. It forms around the sentry, pushing units away and making the sentry immobile, invincible and unable to attack - like its own personal stasis field. Accompanied by a slight radius increase, this would still allow the Sentry to be used for blocking ramps and those types of defensive maneuvers, but would stop it from limiting micro and control. Additionally, add another aura spell that increases friendly unit movement speed. This would facilitate escapes and retreats that the current Force Field helps with. Call it "Energon Field" because that sounds good.
The big problem with Vortex is the exit: units exit all clumped up. So, change that: make units leave the vortex in the same position that the entered. Yes, this is functionally the same as Stasis Field, but it retains the "coolness" factor of Vortex.
While we're on the subject...
Gravitron beam: This is a stun. Stun's are also bad. Make it an AoE spell. Units in the field can be hit by air attacks. Additionally, I think it should have one of two effects: either ground units in the field cannot attack air or air units in the field cannot be hit by units on the ground.
Concussive shells: Again, slows are bad. Change this to a castable ability with a small knockback. This would allow concussive shells to fill its role delaying enemies for a short time without limiting the control and micro that a player can perform.
250mm Strike Cannons: Just ax it. Seriously, no one uses this. If it must be replaced, I think an AoE air attack could be helpful, to actually make the Thor viable against auto-spread Mutalisks. Or give the Thor a self targeting Defensive Matrix to give it added survivability against Tanks, Immortals and Brood Lords.
There you go: these are all my ideas for dealing with micro-limiting abilities.
Yes, it limits micro. The main difference is that with a slow, regardless of the amount of the slow, your ability to escape a chain fungal increases at a ridiculous amount, and at the same time zealots become ridic more effective. Even at 80% slow, you can still attempt to split your fungaled marines in those four seconds and cause the second fungal to only kill say 75% of the amount instead of 100%. Say your vikings are super clumped for some retarded reason, because it needs four fungals to die, you'll be able to save a ton (as well as ravens). 3 clumped medivacs being caught can split in 3 ways, causing 3 times more fungals to be used, etc. Phoenix will actually be able to escape most likely. I think the biggest benefit would be particularly to sentry/stalker/immortal armies, where after the first fungal you could realize what's happening, FF all the infestors off, and prevent the third chain fungal from ever hitting via retreat. That's absolutely HUGE.
|
On the fungal growth subject: How about a "Restore" ability (similar to the medic's ability in BW), but make it an area of effect ability. I wouldn't mind having a couple of Oracles or Sentries late game with that ability with the sole purpose of negating Fungal Growths.
This way (atleast for PvZ) the current Fungal Growth ability can stay as it currently is and will also promote lategame Oracle or Sentry usage.
|
On November 05 2012 15:44 FabledIntegral wrote:
Yes, it limits micro. The main difference is that with a slow, regardless of the amount of the slow, your ability to escape a chain fungal increases at a ridiculous amount, and at the same time zealots become ridic more effective. Even at 80% slow, you can still attempt to split your fungaled marines in those four seconds and cause the second fungal to only kill say 75% of the amount instead of 100%. Say your vikings are super clumped for some retarded reason, because it needs four fungals to die, you'll be able to save a ton (as well as ravens). 3 clumped medivacs being caught can split in 3 ways, causing 3 times more fungals to be used, etc. Phoenix will actually be able to escape most likely. I think the biggest benefit would be particularly to sentry/stalker/immortal armies, where after the first fungal you could realize what's happening, FF all the infestors off, and prevent the third chain fungal from ever hitting via retreat. That's absolutely HUGE.
Right, but you could micro even more if it did not slow at all. Slows and stuns and other types of "crowd control" abilities have one purpose: to bring the skill level of your opponent down to a manageable level. Marines and Blink Stalkers and etc. are too effective when they are controlled by a skilled player; so, Fungal Growth is used to eliminate that skill advantage. A slow would serve the same purpose. Force Field is often used in the same way and that is completely backwards. Abilities should force you to play better, not prevent you from doing so. That is some casual, MMO "leveling the playing field" type nonsense that has no place in a game that is supposed to be played competitively.
It honestly boggles my mind that these abilities are still in the game. It just doesn't make sense.
|
On November 05 2012 16:40 Hoender wrote:
On the fungal growth subject: How about a "Restore" ability (similar to the medic's ability in BW), but make it an area of effect ability. I wouldn't mind having a couple of Oracles or Sentries late game with that ability with the sole purpose of negating Fungal Growths.
This way (atleast for PvZ) the current Fungal Growth ability can stay as it currently is and will also promote lategame Oracle or Sentry usage.
Such a radical ability as Fungal Growth are actually very terrible for a game, because there is no way to counter them. Giving only one race an ability to "get out" is equally terrible.
Either the spell gets removed OR it gets changed to pure damage only ... maybe like the Plague of the Defiler, but then why doesnt the game have Defilers in the first place? For the cost of just 75 energy it is simply too powerful and even Infested Terran is an awful spell, because it stacks. This is the real "make or break" of spells. Do they stack or dont they? Plague doesnt stack, but doesnt kill any units on its own either; Fungal Growth doesnt stack in intensity, but it stacks in duration and it kills anything affected, so it is a very terrible spell. You cant really counter it with EMP either, since it got nerfed so hard and because Zerg will build a lot more Infestors than can be EMPed (or Feedbacked). Leenock had an insane amount of 34 Infestors in a game against Bomber yesterday and you cant win with a crapton of Ghosts, but you can win with a crapton of Infestors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
