EPTon that note, i'd also like to see the widow mine upgrade be changed to reduce the delay between missiles. while i like the decrease in burrow time, i think that decreasing the time that this unit is dead weight is for the best.
[D] Widow Mines, Tanks, and Space Control - Page 6
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
megapants
United States1314 Posts
on that note, i'd also like to see the widow mine upgrade be changed to reduce the delay between missiles. while i like the decrease in burrow time, i think that decreasing the time that this unit is dead weight is for the best. | ||
|
immanentblue
Denmark110 Posts
On January 06 2013 06:25 megapants wrote: i agree that the widow mine should have greater splash damage considering how long the delay is on its missile. on that note, i'd also like to see the widow mine upgrade be changed to reduce the delay between missiles. while i like the decrease in burrow time, i think that decreasing the time that this unit is dead weight is for the best. Well, the point is to make it a strong unit without making it a core damage unit like the marine and marauder... increasing the deploy time makes it so that it can be usefull in certain situations, rather than all situations... only changing combat stats (dps, splash ect) wont change much i feel... | ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
| ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On January 06 2013 12:18 immanentblue wrote: Well, the point is to make it a strong unit without making it a core damage unit like the marine and marauder... increasing the deploy time makes it so that it can be usefull in certain situations, rather than all situations... only changing combat stats (dps, splash ect) wont change much i feel... Really, the more I think about this idea the better it is. A lengthy deployment time would be unique, Terran like, and make the unit play more positional, like an actual mine. It would also make the unit a joy to balance, because it would ONLY be good at establishing territory. Not having to worry about offensive mines or mine harass would open up a ton of possibilities, for example, the rate of fire could be made like a normal unit so that pushing immortals and then the rest of the toss army past a minefield and into the Terran army would not be feasible. The mine could become a truly fearsome buffer with tremendous tank synergy (tanks would be the best unit for "covering" mines)... Mech would just be better and more mech like. Awesome idea. | ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
A second, different, researchable deployment ability allows mines to burrow. The mine takes 30 seconds (longer?) to burrow (but unburrows in the same 3 seconds). Burrowed mines have a much faster attack speed than surface mines- say, 12 seconds. This means three things. Firstly, mines are still useful for stopping all-ins and early pressure. The mine is perfectly visible while doing this job, however. This makes it far less effective at stopping mining in enemy bases for extended periods, and makes the mine ineffective at making in numbers to run into enemy armies and deploying, because even after they are deployed, they can still just be killed. They may get to fire once, but will not be protected by finishing their deploy animation, like they do now. And lastly, it means you can research an ability to make them extremely dangerous positional units in the late game, which are burrowed and have a much higher rate of fire. However this function is virtually useless in an offensive capacity due to the extremely lengthy deploy time. This ability hits the field later than the plain-sight version as it requires research, and is fundamentally less offensively useful since you can't very well run next to an enemy and wait 30 seconds before firing. Damage, splash, single target stuff, etc. all negotiable. It also does seem a bit inelegant to have two deploy abilities. But it does create a choice for each mine at each point in time, since they are mutually exclusive. | ||
|
megapants
United States1314 Posts
On January 06 2013 12:18 immanentblue wrote: Well, the point is to make it a strong unit without making it a core damage unit like the marine and marauder... increasing the deploy time makes it so that it can be usefull in certain situations, rather than all situations... only changing combat stats (dps, splash ect) wont change much i feel... i think that would be nice and dynamic, but that doesn't address what i said which is to increase the mine's missile fire rate. in fact, were blizzard to implement a very prolonged deployment, i think that only emphasizes the need to reduce the cooldown on the missile. i think combining both our suggestions would improve the mine's design drastically. | ||
|
pmp10
3396 Posts
Nearly all the changes to terran mech have been an attempt to make it move/deploy/harass better while nothing related to zoning and positioning was touched. A world were autoturrets and neo-steel bunkers are fine but the real problem of mech-play is lack of medivac drops is quite depressing. | ||
|
immanentblue
Denmark110 Posts
On January 06 2013 15:22 megapants wrote: i think that would be nice and dynamic, but that doesn't address what i said which is to increase the mine's missile fire rate. in fact, were blizzard to implement a very prolonged deployment, i think that only emphasizes the need to reduce the cooldown on the missile. i think combining both our suggestions would improve the mine's design drastically. Of course what im talking about has to be seen in combination with a buff, either in fire rate, splash radius or something like that... I just dont think we can determine excactly what that is, without making the unit work properly, design wise in the first place... What i imagine is, a mine thats hard to deploy, but once deployed, makes an area very hard to enter... | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On January 04 2013 22:18 ledarsi wrote: Number 1- PDD really, really should stop Broodlord projectiles. There is no good reason for PDD not to work against them at all. Number 2- Terran needs a better way to fight Corruptor+Broodlord. Massing Vikings sort of works, but then Fungal makes large corruptor-viking battles extremely difficult for terran. The new Raven Seeker Missile is a solution that works by sniping it with a powerful single-target spell. However I think a better solution is to have an anti-air splash damage spell (i.e. Raven Seeker Missile, WoL style) to aid the Vikings in fighting the Corruptors. Giving it 9 range, like Fungal has, would be a better solution. Additionally, I think it would be cool to have the delayed-target missile still be in the game, but not on the Seeker Missile dealing 300 like a poor man's Yamato. Instead, make a much smaller missile on the Viking. Vikings are more numerous and might have multiple missiles each. Making them able to be used against both ground or air targets at long range from either mode would be excellent. These can be used in a variety of ways- just need to be careful with the damage number so they aren't free worker kills. Although, actually, that might not be the end of the world considering how late a significant number of Vikings arrives, the missile research being done, and how many missiles would be needed to deal significant economic damage that might be better spent shooting military targets. The Viking is already intended to counter Broodlords- it just has to fight the Corruptors first. Ravens should be able to prevent Broodlords from damaging your ground units for a short time using PDD while this fight happens. It might also be an improvement to make Corruptor attacks not be intercepted by PDD, and rework Corruption to be a more interesting and powerful ability as well. I would like to see a hold fire or target fire only command for tanks. That would help a lot against the classic broodlord-infestor-corruptor army. Especially if the fungal range is toned down again. Tanks would still be able to control the area infestors can enter even with broodlords on the field, because they could stay in siegemode. This change would also make tanks a little bit better in a few other scenarios, especially if they are controlled well. This change would make tanks better at controlling space as soon as broodlords are on the field. | ||
|
Duncaaaaaan
United Kingdom101 Posts
After that however, they are not very useful, so phase them out quickly and replace with better stuff like medivacs or tanks. And WMs were never meant to be offensive units. The 160 damage made it so that you can just move them into a deathball and burrow them with the 1 second upgrade. Awful. Snipe the observer or overseer and that shit really was insane. The 120 damage makes it not a complete coinflip if you want to do a drop or banshee harass, but they can snipe a muta off. And the 35 damage vs non armoured is fine IMO, tanks slaughter lings, banelings and marines because they like to conglomerate into a nice meaty ball. Chargelots were a problem in WoL, but now they are super hard countered by hellbats. Come on, stop QQ'ing and learn to play. Tanks are expensive but keep them safe and alive and when you get 10 tanks, space control is amazing, the opponent is very apprehensive to move forward into it because he may not know how many more tanks there may be. And immobility? Turrets. Sensor towers. If you're going mech, you're going to be floating minerals. People forget sensor towers so much, they are literally map hacks. What I really hate right now is that protoss can just transition to mass carriers, chrono those bastards out and A move to victory. Vikings get wrecked by carriers okay. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On January 08 2013 21:34 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Widow mines are excellent for keeping safe vs baneling busts, allows you to make a greedy 3rd, make it in the main and morph it into a PF at your 3rd. After that however, they are not very useful, so phase them out quickly and replace with better stuff like medivacs or tanks. And WMs were never meant to be offensive units. The 160 damage made it so that you can just move them into a deathball and burrow them with the 1 second upgrade. Awful. Snipe the observer or overseer and that shit really was insane. The 120 damage makes it not a complete coinflip if you want to do a drop or banshee harass, but they can snipe a muta off. And the 35 damage vs non armoured is fine IMO, tanks slaughter lings, banelings and marines because they like to conglomerate into a nice meaty ball. Chargelots were a problem in WoL, but now they are super hard countered by hellbats. Come on, stop QQ'ing and learn to play. Tanks are expensive but keep them safe and alive and when you get 10 tanks, space control is amazing, the opponent is very apprehensive to move forward into it because he may not know how many more tanks there may be. And immobility? Turrets. Sensor towers. If you're going mech, you're going to be floating minerals. People forget sensor towers so much, they are literally map hacks. What I really hate right now is that protoss can just transition to mass carriers, chrono those bastards out and A move to victory. Vikings get wrecked by carriers okay. 1. Tanks slaughter lings? What? A Siege Tank only deals its 35 damage in the primary splash radius and everything else is just "flashy Hollywood explosions" that look awesome but dont actually deal any serious damage. Those 35 damage wont even kill one ling if the Zerg has +1 armor before the Terran has +1 attack for his mech ... which is very likely since Zerg can start much earlier AND its more useful for them too. 35 base damage for tanks is RUBBISH! 2. Right ... take your 10 tanks (=30 supply) and "control space" ... at ONE SPOT, but what about the rest of the spots on the map where your opponent simply goes around your clump of tanks to kill your bases? Thats not "controlling space", thats stupid / useless. | ||
|
Duncaaaaaan
United Kingdom101 Posts
On January 08 2013 21:56 Rabiator wrote: 1. Tanks slaughter lings? What? A Siege Tank only deals its 35 damage in the primary splash radius and everything else is just "flashy Hollywood explosions" that look awesome but dont actually deal any serious damage. Those 35 damage wont even kill one ling if the Zerg has +1 armor before the Terran has +1 attack for his mech ... which is very likely since Zerg can start much earlier AND its more useful for them too. 35 base damage for tanks is RUBBISH! 2. Right ... take your 10 tanks (=30 supply) and "control space" ... at ONE SPOT, but what about the rest of the spots on the map where your opponent simply goes around your clump of tanks to kill your bases? Thats not "controlling space", thats stupid / useless. You use your vikings, turrets and sensor towers and hellions to deny drops. Yes you can't control a huge amount of space on the big maps, so keep them in your base and turtle or contain your opponent. Use your fucking head, holy shit. Clumping your tanks into a ball instead of spreading them out in a tank line in the middle of the map is shit, yes, so stop doing it. | ||
|
Sissors
1395 Posts
Anyway so your 'solution' where we had to 'use your fucking heads' for is to turtle on 3 bases? And then you think it is weird the toss can just mass carriers? | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Why do some people keep whining about tanks so much.. They are already quite good and used all the time in TvT and TvZ... Both in bio mech and in pure mech.. You can not simply buff them bigtime like this as it would make them rediculously overpowered... Also STOP comparing sc2 to bw so literally. Damage, supply costs etc. just can't be compared between games. Tanks in sc2 rarely overkill, they do so all the time in BW. Supply is completely different between the game and useless to compare.. A small siege tank buff in return for a longer setup time could be fine to make mech play a bit more tactical and make tanks stronger in a sieged position. With current map design and only a need for 3 bases I worry this will just lead to split maps and boring stalls though so I rather see the siege tank kept as it is. Widow mine does need some serious changes, I have absolutely no clue why blizzard has taken the route on that unit like they have now. It absolutely makes no sense.. It's a pretty good early unit against zerg now and absolutely crap against protoss. Terran doesn't need zoning abilities against lots of small units because they have hellions for that! They don't really need zoning ability against light air either because they have the superb turret and marines or thors already.. Terran needs a zoning unit against beefy protoss units like stalkers and maybe voidray/oracles but that's exactly what the widow mine sucks for now.. I still don't get why the widow mine is not just an actual mine.. Detonates itself, costs only 1 supply and is cheaper but actually kills protoss units! Terran changes in HotS are an absolute joke, the only really good thing they basically get is the hellbat upgrade which is about as boring as it get's, transforming your fast unit into a slow boring unit for slightly better stats.. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19339 Posts
It first started with inquiring whether widow mine drops during battles are feasable... On January 30 2013 21:56 BisuDagger wrote: Do widow mines help out with BL/Infestor engagements in Hots? That first engagement corrupters ate up the vikings. On January 30 2013 21:58 Noocta wrote: Good luck moving the mines in range of this shit with all the lings and broodlings on the ground. On January 30 2013 22:00 BisuDagger wrote: So there's nothing tricky like medivac dropping window mines in range during battle. ...I quickly learned that they were to squishy and came up with a solution On January 30 2013 22:01 Micromnky wrote: Maybe, you might be able to if you have the tunneling claws upgrade, for the faster burrowing. But pretty much, they're reeeeally fragile. You need to run a mass of them in with you army, and expect to lose some no matter what, or bait the opponent over set up ones On January 30 2013 22:07 BisuDagger wrote: They should add another upgradeable buff that gives them increased armor(like lurker eggs) while burrowing and diminishes within seconds after burrow completes. That way the unit has to be really focus fired at during burrow, so you can either run or be caught in the widow mine chaos trying to target it down. So is this upgrade a good solution or am I missing the purpose of widow mines. I merely want to improve their utility on the field. I am not in the HOTS beta so this is my place for questions and answers. | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On December 24 2012 16:20 link0 wrote: Agree with the OP. The #1 reason why terran isn't satisfy to play is because it has devolved into a deathball army instead of a positional army. The only 2 units for space control: tanks and mines, are totally shit at actually controlling space. You obviously have not seen Dragon melt opponents dumb enough to charge into marine/tank/ widow mine wall. | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
Kvassten
Sweden159 Posts
On January 09 2013 00:23 Markwerf wrote: Widow mine does need some serious changes, I have absolutely no clue why blizzard has taken the route on that unit like they have now. It absolutely makes no sense.. It's a pretty good early unit against zerg now and absolutely crap against protoss. Terran doesn't need zoning abilities against lots of small units because they have hellions for that! They don't really need zoning ability against light air either because they have the superb turret and marines or thors already.. Terran needs a zoning unit against beefy protoss units like stalkers and maybe voidray/oracles but that's exactly what the widow mine sucks for now.. I still don't get why the widow mine is not just an actual mine.. Detonates itself, costs only 1 supply and is cheaper but actually kills protoss units! Terran changes in HotS are an absolute joke, the only really good thing they basically get is the hellbat upgrade which is about as boring as it get's, transforming your fast unit into a slow boring unit for slightly better stats.. I agree with this, because of the WM it's really really hard to play bio in TvT :S | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12032 Posts
On February 01 2013 03:53 Kvassten wrote: I agree with this, because of the WM it's really really hard to play bio in TvT :S Marauders outrange widowmines don't they? You're a bio player against mech so you should have a lot of money for more CCs and lots of bases, so you could have plenty of scans. | ||
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
On February 01 2013 03:14 Garmer wrote: tanks need a late game upgrade that make them do much more damage Or perhaps better upgrade scaling so that they can stay at the same strength level in regards to early rushes and one base builds while actually being a threat and controlling space (as opposed to the current state of "Tanks? Oh I'll just make another round of speedlings and cost effectively a-move him") later on vs the extreme mobility creep in this game in addition to the 4 new HotS tank hard counters combined with already superior P/Z production mechanics (which means that Terran mech units need to be cost effective as you can't reasonably rebuild them; a mere 4 factories with add-ons costs 800/500 and 4 factories is hardly any production past 15 minutes). The siege mode research upgrade should return, as the upgrade not existing is just unusual; if they're worried about mech early game being too hard then they can reduce the research time or reduce cost. Increase natural tank upgrade scaling, or add a fusion core or expensive armory level damage upgrade. Voila. Tank is fixed without hurting the early-mid game, everyone is happy, and the quality of games improve. | ||
| ||
