|
On October 27 2012 15:50 BronzeKnee wrote:
________________________________________________________
The Map Pool Menace
________________________________________________________
Yeah. Its hard to balance a game where a different game is played every time. Think of ohana for protoss with sentry/immortal. Think of Steppes of war where cheese is impossible to hold off.
|
On November 11 2012 08:47 testthewest wrote:
I don't understand, why "mech" as a standalone should ever need to work. Protoss all-Robotics armies also don't work....
Different races are different, and Terran has a distinct set of upgrades for Bio and Mech while Protoss Robo units share the same ones with Gateway units. That is why it should need to work.
More variety = More fun.
As a Protoss player, I find the change to the Immortal as a buff not a nerf. It isn't nearly as expensive (so you can afford more), builds faster and has nearly the same DPS, thus your army has more DPS now, and has more overall hit points. The only real loss is Hardened Shields, which are very effective vs Siege Tanks and Ultralisks, units that are weak vs Protoss. If anything, I think the new Immortal could be too strong vs Mech because it can be massed so easily, and Terran can only handle them with Siege Tanks in siege mode and some units to buffer.
Try out the map, and let me know what you think.
On November 11 2012 10:28 imJealous wrote:
Great write up.
I think the immortal/colossus suggestions, ultralisk suggestions, and the flaming betty/perdition turret idea are fantastic ideas that would really open up more possibilities than the game currently has.
Its funny that you started to write about making mech viable, and in the process also laid out a really solid solution to the stagnating meta game issues of PvZ/ZvP.
Thanks for the kind comments. I really hope Blizzard at least reads it...
|
On November 11 2012 08:52 ledarsi wrote:
Testthewest, you simply have no bloody idea what you are talking about. Install Brood War, and just TRY to go mech. It is HARD. Bio is much easier. Saying that "one race can just turtle and force the other player to be much better than him to win" is mind-blowingly ignorant. There is a strong case to be made that mech is the most difficult composition to use effectively in the entire game.
Well, BW tanks all fired their shot on the first zealot in range, the rest could march throu, isn't it?
Before you say someone else has no idea, please try to imagine what that person was thinking.
Sieging up 3 tanks would be enough to push back a much bigger force under this scenario. So defending becomes alot easier for a race that's already quite good at it.
So fast expanding, getting 2 tanks should not be enough, if the opponent wants to break it.
On November 11 2012 08:52 ledarsi wrote:
Furthermore, Terran's upgrade structure forces specialization. Bio upgrades do not apply to mech, and vice versa. So unless you want to spend twice as much on upgrades as zerg or protoss, you are going to have to lean heavily on one or the other. This is intentional.
Well, that's quite simplistic. First: You don't need mech armor upgrades, if you just getting some tanks. Then you are basically down to 3 upgrades, just like protoss (weapons/armor/shields) or zerg (melee/range/armor).
You can see this "upgrade-behaviour" already now in TvT. Example: Those Polt vs Ganzi games some hours ago.
On November 11 2012 08:52 ledarsi wrote:
Protoss Robotics never was a complete structure. Observer, Shuttle, and Reaver? Only one of those units can actually attack. Protoss Robotics is a supporting tech path for strong Gateway units. Totally different from the Factory, which has its own complete line of upgrades from the Armory.
This is not SC1. There is no reaver, but an immortal and colossus.
I only made this example to point out: Protoss also lack the option to just ignore their basic units, and go for something different instead. There is no reason why terran players should be able to ignore marines/marauders after minute 4.
|
On November 11 2012 18:24 testthewest wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2012 08:52 ledarsi wrote:
Protoss Robotics never was a complete structure. Observer, Shuttle, and Reaver? Only one of those units can actually attack. Protoss Robotics is a supporting tech path for strong Gateway units. Totally different from the Factory, which has its own complete line of upgrades from the Armory. This is not SC1. There is no reaver, but an immortal and colossus. I only made this example to point out: Protoss also lack the option to just ignore their basic units, and go for something different instead. There is no reason why terran players should be able to ignore marines/marauders after minute 4.
Why shouldnt they be able to do it? The reason why they should be is the upgrades and the style of units.
A mech unit is different from a bio unit in that it is mechanical and not biological and less mobile instead of fast and able to sprint. These two styles dont mix well and immobile units dont really "support" very mobile ones well enough. So the only reasonable way is to focus much more on mech ... and this should be viable, because you need to have both upgrades for mech to make them survive long enough. If you do that your bio portion of the army will suck due to a lack of upgrades AND numbers. "A few" Marines dont cut it, but sadly there is no mech AA that is viable because the Thor sucks against armored air units, so mech needs to go air as well against Corrupter/Broodlords AND invest into upgrades to make those Vikings more efficient. They are already needed as spotters anyways, but wouldnt need upgrades for that job alone.
Protoss has been designed as an "integrated army" and thus the units got a similar movement speed to form a tight ball of death. That isnt what mech + bio could do, so your argument has a huge hole in it.
|
Very thought-out post. I like your suggestions. I specially like the fact that you took the time to analyse the consequences of changing A and not stopping there. If you will get a version of the map on Europe i'd be glad to test it.
|
Well, after testing I believe Vikings can receive a slight nerf, reducing their movespeed to 2.50 in the air. They are too mobile vs slower Colossus play.
On November 11 2012 21:07 Kakaru2 wrote:
Very thought-out post. I like your suggestions. I specially like the fact that you took the time to analyse the consequences of changing A and not stopping there. If you will get a version of the map on Europe i'd be glad to test it.
I'd be happy to send you the latest version of the map unlocked so you could publish it on Europe. PM me your email if you're interested.
|
On November 12 2012 03:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
Well, after testing I believe Vikings can receive a slight nerf, reducing their movespeed to 2.50 in the air. They are too mobile vs slower Colossus play.
If you nerf Vikings for the sake of Colossi you nerf them against Mutalisks and "Fungal" (making targeting Vikings even easier) as well. Neither of those parts are really good and this clearly shows the problem of trying to fix it from the unit side.
Stalkers are supposed to be used against Vikings anyways and you could even do what I think Seed did against one EG Zerg in the IPTL: Just build ZERO Colossi and hallucinate some to provoke your opponent into building those AA air units. Getting a few hallucinated ones in addition to the real ones will also help against Vikings ... but no one does it.
|
United States479 Posts
On November 11 2012 10:28 imJealous wrote:
Great write up.
I think the immortal/colossus suggestions, ultralisk suggestions, and the flaming betty/perdition turret idea are fantastic ideas that would really open up more possibilities than the game currently has.
Its funny that you started to write about making mech viable, and in the process also laid out a really solid solution to the stagnating meta game issues of PvZ/ZvP.
Don't stroke his ego.
User was warned for this post
|
On November 12 2012 03:56 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 03:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
Well, after testing I believe Vikings can receive a slight nerf, reducing their movespeed to 2.50 in the air. They are too mobile vs slower Colossus play. If you nerf Vikings for the sake of Colossi you nerf them against Mutalisks and "Fungal" (making targeting Vikings even easier) as well. Neither of those parts are really good and this clearly shows the problem of trying to fix it from the unit side. Stalkers are supposed to be used against Vikings anyways and you could even do what I think Seed did against one EG Zerg in the IPTL: Just build ZERO Colossi and hallucinate some to provoke your opponent into building those AA air units. Getting a few hallucinated ones in addition to the real ones will also help against Vikings ... but no one does it.
Well, Vikings are never the answer to Mutalisks, they aren't cost effective at all, but your point about Fungal is important. I do believe Fungal needs to be reworked in general, and I believe Blizzard will do so soon. I think if Fungal did a 50% movespeed reduction and still inhibited Blink Stalkers from Blinking it would be better. Perhaps even that is too much, maybe 30% movespeed reduction.
Anyway, I used to hallucinate Colossus all the time vs Terran, but a lot of Terrans will scan your army just before an big engagement, and it always gives away the fact I had hallucinated units, and I had to give up that strategy.
On November 12 2012 12:47 MugenXBanksy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2012 10:28 imJealous wrote:
Great write up.
I think the immortal/colossus suggestions, ultralisk suggestions, and the flaming betty/perdition turret idea are fantastic ideas that would really open up more possibilities than the game currently has.
Its funny that you started to write about making mech viable, and in the process also laid out a really solid solution to the stagnating meta game issues of PvZ/ZvP. Don't stroke his ego.
Don't tell people what to do. If you have a problem with me, my post, or my ego, take it up with me. Otherwise, you can find a different thread.
|
United States479 Posts
On November 12 2012 13:48 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 03:56 Rabiator wrote:On November 12 2012 03:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
Well, after testing I believe Vikings can receive a slight nerf, reducing their movespeed to 2.50 in the air. They are too mobile vs slower Colossus play. If you nerf Vikings for the sake of Colossi you nerf them against Mutalisks and "Fungal" (making targeting Vikings even easier) as well. Neither of those parts are really good and this clearly shows the problem of trying to fix it from the unit side. Stalkers are supposed to be used against Vikings anyways and you could even do what I think Seed did against one EG Zerg in the IPTL: Just build ZERO Colossi and hallucinate some to provoke your opponent into building those AA air units. Getting a few hallucinated ones in addition to the real ones will also help against Vikings ... but no one does it. Well, Vikings are never the answer to Mutalisks, they aren't cost effective at all, but your point about Fungal is important. I do believe Fungal needs to be reworked in general, and I believe Blizzard will do so soon. I think if Fungal did a 50% movespeed reduction and still inhibited Blink Stalkers from Blinking it would be better. Perhaps even that is too much, maybe 30% movespeed reduction. Anyway, I used to hallucinate Colossus all the time vs Terran, but a lot of Terrans will scan your army just before an big engagement, and it always gives away the fact I had hallucinated units, and I had to give up that strategy. Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 12:47 MugenXBanksy wrote:On November 11 2012 10:28 imJealous wrote:
Great write up.
I think the immortal/colossus suggestions, ultralisk suggestions, and the flaming betty/perdition turret idea are fantastic ideas that would really open up more possibilities than the game currently has.
Its funny that you started to write about making mech viable, and in the process also laid out a really solid solution to the stagnating meta game issues of PvZ/ZvP. Don't stroke his ego. Don't tell people what to do. If you have a problem with me, my post, or my ego, take it up with me. Otherwise, you can find a different thread.
Nah 
|
Incredibly well written and well researched post. I agree entirely.
|
The suggestion I like most is the one about immortals, but hardened shield is a nice ability. Early on it forces target fire on tanks and protoss players can do some nice play trying to make big hitting units fire on them first. Maybe hardened shield could be reworked to tank less damage, by having less shield or reducing the damage to more than 10.
Edit : Also since I see some talking about fungal, if hopefully Blizzard nerfs fungal a bit it would allow to tweak other units like the viking.
|
On October 30 2012 00:55 BronzeKnee wrote:Thanks for all the praise guys, I really appreciate it. I'm sorry you don't see a cohesive argument kcdc, but I can't fix that because I see one, and so do others. Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 16:28 Rabiator wrote:
The idea of the Flaming Betty is nice and much better than Widow mine and Hellion transformation together, BUT it has one problem: It is too cheap! There either needs to be an upgrade which is higher up in the tech tree OR it should cost some resources to build the turrets. Otherwise you would just build lots of Hellions very early and block the expos of your opponent with 2-4 of these turrets. Against Zerg this would be devastating!
I also like the idea of getting rid of the stupid Thor and instead getting the Goliath back. The giant and slow ass Thor is simply too easy to abuse by opponents. Yeah, you're probably right that the Betty would need an upgrade since it would be a powerful expansion block. I was wrestling over it myself, but didn't think of the expansion block. Probably need a Tech Lab upgrade, or require an Armory to drop the Flaming Bettys. This might not make it viable vs early all-ins though... Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 22:04 CYFAWS wrote:
How can a thread like this receive praise? It proposes a million changes which completely reworks the game in several different areas. Untestable...
So you scold me proposing a lot changes that completely reworks the game in several different areas. Fine, I can respect people who don't think huge changes are a great idea. But then you say this: Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 22:04 CYFAWS wrote:
As always, the answer in my mind is increased unit radius, massive tank buff, increased protoss early defense and a better early protoss answer to marines so the 111 doesn't bork. Really? Don't scold me then turn around and do exactly the same thing, especially with no evidence! You have some ideas in your mind about how to improve the game, and you've obviously sold them to yourself. And apparently when you hear other peoples ideas that are different, you dismiss them, because the answer in your mind is the answer, and thus nothing else can be the answer. Open your mind.
haha. I'm not doing the same thing. It's like comparing a watermelon to a strawberry really. The small set of things i suggested are few, very easily testable and implementable.
"open your mind" argument = not an argument.
|
On November 15 2012 22:30 CYFAWS wrote:
haha. I'm not doing the same thing. It's like comparing a watermelon to a strawberry really. The small set of things i suggested are few, very easily testable and implementable.
"open your mind" argument = not an argument.
It is an argument, check the definition. Regardless, increasing unit radius is more game changing than anything I've suggested. It would literally change every single unit the game and their interaction with every other unit, as well as how they fit between structures, up and down ramps, how effective FF's are (they'd be more effective if units can't fit between small gaps), melee units would be increasing less effective in large numbers (think about how Ultras work right now...), while ranged units would be increasing less effective in small numbers vs melee units because they couldn't clump as well (more surface area), AOE damage and effects would be far less effective (which means Protoss which depends so heavily on damage from Storm and Colossus would need to be adjusted).
And those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head right now. Increasing unit radius is a massive change.
And your other changes are very similar to mine. You want to buff Tanks, and give Protoss a way to deal with early Marines, just as I've done.
|
In this age, where the maps and units available to the other races are just so favorable against tanks, tanks need some type of buff. Swarm host, viper, brood lords, tempests, immortals, and protoss in general besides non blink stalkers, all crush tanks, especially with current map designs. There is so much ground to hold, and tanks have so many hard counters now that they are very inneffective past a certain window
|
I can't see why people only accuse Infestor as most OP spell caster in the game. Well of course, one fungal shuts down all of the micro you intend to do. However, there are some problems that will come up EVEN THOUGH we finish this fix.
For example, the one main thing that Terran and Zerg is suffering from is the Immortals. Terran because of killing Tanks so fast with taking little to no damage. Zerg because shuts down Ultralisk play completely.
I just want to say that Infestor is NOT the only unit that breaks ( if you think so ) the game. Many other aspects such as clumped up unit pathways and super cost effective marines can be a problem also.
If you want to see the whole post about "How to make Mech and Stargate play viable" by BronzeKnee, be my guest. It's a very good post about other balance changes.
|
United States479 Posts
On November 16 2012 04:38 Valerian wrote:
I can't see why people only accuse Infestor as most OP spell caster in the game. Well of course, one fungal shuts down all of the micro you intend to do. However, there are some problems that will come up EVEN THOUGH we finish this fix.
For example, the one main thing that Terran and Zerg is suffering from is the Immortals. Terran because of killing Tanks so fast with taking little to no damage. Zerg because shuts down Ultralisk play completely.
I just want to say that Infestor is NOT the only unit that breaks ( if you think so ) the game. Many other aspects such as clumped up unit pathways and super cost effective marines can be a problem also.
If you want to see the whole post about "How to make Mech and Stargate play viable" by BronzeKnee, be my guest. It's a very good post about other balance changes.
In PvZ really how common is it for players to be making Immortals at most usually only 2 robos and even then unless the retention of your immortals are really good its shouldn't really be a probably the only time I have ever more robos was in a weird PvT that I played the same guy on ladder a couple times in a row back to back doing this weird mech play and lots of planetaries and I had 3 robos chrono'ing immortals out with a zealot archon immortal army with ht support to feedback banshees, ravens and thors.
By the time the late late ultra tech switch unless the player just wanted to go ultras which in this case most would call people retarded Nestea would go ultras for the lawlz. Ultras aren't bad because of immortals especially when zealots and archons which are what usually accompanies the immortals in the first place lings.
And the winfestors' OP growth is a bigger problem then anything else right now. If you question it not being op you must play zerg right? They are the only ones who don't have a problem with it currently unless all you play is zvz and then its like hey lets throw each other's free units at each other which is a pretty bad concept in and of it's self.
|
On November 16 2012 06:22 MugenXBanksy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 04:38 Valerian wrote:
I can't see why people only accuse Infestor as most OP spell caster in the game. Well of course, one fungal shuts down all of the micro you intend to do. However, there are some problems that will come up EVEN THOUGH we finish this fix.
For example, the one main thing that Terran and Zerg is suffering from is the Immortals. Terran because of killing Tanks so fast with taking little to no damage. Zerg because shuts down Ultralisk play completely.
I just want to say that Infestor is NOT the only unit that breaks ( if you think so ) the game. Many other aspects such as clumped up unit pathways and super cost effective marines can be a problem also.
If you want to see the whole post about "How to make Mech and Stargate play viable" by BronzeKnee, be my guest. It's a very good post about other balance changes. In PvZ really how common is it for players to be making Immortals at most usually only 2 robos and even then unless the retention of your immortals are really good its shouldn't really be a probably the only time I have ever more robos was in a weird PvT that I played the same guy on ladder a couple times in a row back to back doing this weird mech play and lots of planetaries and I had 3 robos chrono'ing immortals out with a zealot archon immortal army with ht support to feedback banshees, ravens and thors. By the time the late late ultra tech switch unless the player just wanted to go ultras which in this case most would call people retarded Nestea would go ultras for the lawlz. Ultras aren't bad because of immortals especially when zealots and archons which are what usually accompanies the immortals in the first place lings. And the winfestors' OP growth is a bigger problem then anything else right now. If you question it not being op you must play zerg right? They are the only ones who don't have a problem with it currently unless all you play is zvz and then its like hey lets throw each other's free units at each other which is a pretty bad concept in and of it's self.
You should format your post better, it is difficult to understand fully. Even when you did your dumb one liners that got you warned, at least you used proper punctuation and capitalization.
Anyway, his point about Immortals is the same one I made in the original post. Immortals are incredibly powerful, and their presence shuts down Mech and Ultralisk play to such an extent that people rarely use those units against Protoss. Thus, we rarely get to see many Immortals built, because the units they counter aren't built because if people did build them, Immortals would crush them. And this is the problem with certain unit counters that I pointed out in the section "Attack of the Counters." Immortals don't allow you to handle certain units, they force your opponent to not build them, and this limits viable selection in the game and variety.
This is a different situation than Infestors. Fungal Growth is effective versus everything. It is good against light units, armored units, air units, massive units, cloaked units, whatever. So Infestors can be seen and used in every matchup. If the Immortal was as effective against every target as is it against armored ground target, it would clearly be overpowered. But as it is, it is only overpowered vs armored units, so people just avoid making big expensive armored units (Mech and Ultralisks) vs Protoss, and thus we don't see many Immortals. There is nothing you can build that can avoid the power of Infestors, they are effective versus any unit combination.
Both are problems.
|
what if you switched the immortal and sentry and made gateway build units faster (near current warpgate rates) and made warpgates build slightly slower (near current gateway build times)? with your suggestion could make it even more of a desirable simple tanking unit.
also what about with your warhound taking the thor's anti air role in a way removing the thor's anti air attack in favor of a slower stronger ground attack to deal large single target damage? really shove the thor into that role?
just coming up with ideas
|
Not many people realize but the best counter to tempest/templar composition is hellion and viking. You use hellion to quickly get close to templar and kill them with bonus damage to light. And the templar can storm hellion effectively. And then the viking can kill tempest. 2 Vikings beat 1 tempest. It's very cost-effective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
