EPTThe Roach is whats wrong with SC2. - Page 13
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Lordpen
Sweden21 Posts
| ||
|
Doc Daneeka
United States577 Posts
On April 05 2010 16:02 Ultra Brian wrote: however I think George Lucas has a legitamate grievance with starcraft copying the droid from the new star wars movie that rolls around and puts up its shields to fight. Huge rip off.. yeah but starcraft rips everything off in sci-fi. as does warcraft in fantasy. blizzard is like the one-stop disaster shelter supply of speculative fiction. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
On April 05 2010 16:02 Ultra Brian wrote: I've seen alot of smack talk about roaches on this forum and I think its pretty ridiculous. I don't think they should be removed to rid the world of immortals and marauders. How about instead of getting rid of marauders and immortals they sh,uld decrease there power against tier one units. If starcraft is so keen on having hard counters they should have units that are supposed to counter immortals and marauders work better. The fact marauders are starting to look like terrans main attack units should get blizzard to realize they shouldn't create units that are so effective against everything. I don't have as much problems with immortals as they are harder to mass, since they are high tech and expensive. however I think George Lucas has a legitamate grievance with starcraft copying the droid from the new star wars movie that rolls around and puts up its shields to fight. Huge rip off.. Your grammatical errors and completely unrelated reference to George Lucas does not help your credibility. Yes, the majority of "smack talk" about units in general is usually unfounded. The OP is not "smack-talking" Roaches. The OP is not advocating the removal of Roaches. The OP is addressing an error in the design of Starcraft 2 that adversely affects unit relationships with other units. The roach is simply REPRESENTATIVE of this issue. The issue: Tier 1.5 units deal too much damage and are too robust for their cost. EDIT: Apologies if I come off as a jerk, but if there is one thing I hate, it's people missing the point of something. | ||
|
Rucky
United States717 Posts
| ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
marauders/roaches/immortals do feel a bit broken. i'm eager to see if blizz attends to this before going life with wings of liberty or decides to leave this for the next sc2 release. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
On April 05 2010 16:35 Rucky wrote: so make them deal less damage and make them less robust for their cost This needs to be a comprehensive change throughout most units in Starcraft 2. | ||
|
patrick321
United States185 Posts
On April 05 2010 14:32 Azarkon wrote: + Show Spoiler + Koltz, biomech might work in rare situations but in the pro-scene meta-game it doesn't work. But why focus on biomech, which is an entire suite of units? Hard counters definitely do exists in BW and to a large degree: Lurkers vs. zealots - it doesn't even matter how well you micro your zealots; half a dozen lurkers at a choke point will make them wasted minerals Zerglings vs. dragoons - again, unless you're blocking a ramp (something you can do in SC 2, as well), dragoons cannot go against mass zerglings no matter how well you micro Reavers vs. zerglings - again, doesn't matter how well you micro; a reaver in a shuttle, or even two reavers on ground, will kill any number of zerglings Vultures vs. zerglings - same thing; this, along with biomech hard countering hydras, is the reason TVZ's meta game is lurkers & mutas Siege tanks & vultures vs. biomech - biomech just doesn't work, which is the reason TVT is mech vs. mech And of course, the whole stealth & air vs. ground hard counters that have always been in SC. I disagree strongly with the idea behind this post and would contend that the only hard counter here worth mentioning is that cracklings > goons. Even then, 3 gate goon builds exist pvz which rely on superior micro to take out the opposing lings. The rest of your supposed hard counters are merely duplications of a single theme: splash units deal very well with low hp units. The key factor to understand is that in starcraft all of those low hp units are given superior speed to make up for their other shortcomings which enable them to beat your listed hard counters through superior micro. We don't frequently see this in mid to late game because as the army sizes grow it becomes increasingly difficult to apply the right micro and avoid the increased amount of area attacks. That doesn't stop us from seeing zealots surround and kill lurkers PvZ. Or oov surprising some terran with mid game mm before siege splash reached critical mass. Or forgg beating kal with mm + tank despite kal's awe inspiring reaver control (link). Heck, there used to be a micro ums map where you had to kill a reaver with 8 lings. I contend that the majority of starcraft units are merely soft counters to each other and nothing you have shown proves otherwise. I can't speak from experience as i don't have a sc2 key but from what i understand this isn't always the case in that game. The hard counters are actually one unit defeating another so thoroughly that no amount of micro will help; akin to firebats against golies in sc1. This kind of hard counter is something that should be minimized in most situations but isn't. But, again, i don't have the sc2 experience to confirm or deny that. ps. How could you think lurkers have 200 hp?! | ||
|
MavercK
Australia2181 Posts
i think roaches with an armor nerf. maybe even damage nerf. marauders with attack speed/damage nerf immortals... i think are fine. they are tech 2. extremly costly to mass. they seem fine. i know +50 damage is alot and they absolutely remove tanks amazing damage (unless your good with EMP) but yea. my 2 cents. i feel like this would reduce roaches to nice tanky units (although im still HEAVILY against zerg having a "tanky" unit except for ultras. it doesn't seem to fit zergs playstyle of heavy mapcontrol at all) marauders would be tank'ish supporting units. and immortals would stay the same i really feel they are fine. | ||
|
barthos
United States30 Posts
| ||
|
roemy
Germany432 Posts
i can't say if its due to the damage system, but (who'd have guessed) it's all connected. what currently happens is 4 roaches have as much HP as an ultralisk - which needs his extra upgrade to finally get 1 more armor than them. granted, ultralisks can't be slowed by marauders or lifted by phoenixes and it might be "easier" to use a queen's transfusion on them. but why spend 200gas on an ultralisk when 4 roaches are 100gas. the ully deals a fully upgraded 24damage, a single roach 22. i believe the range takes care of the AoE argument as well. and then there's immortals' shields ofc. but that's just one disparity [which could still be relatively-easily salvaged by removing the "armored" attribute on the ully]; basically the roach is a zealot with range 3, an option of cloak-like mobility, and unsplit damage - which is great for anything except immortals. but yes, the marauder is equally "cost efficient". if it was introduced because of the roach i cannot say. but it sure took away the role of the tank - unsieged anyways. why try to micro with a tank when a marauder can be stim'ed, has "slow" and can be healed for free. i know i know: it's not like we did it a lot in sc:bw - but still; it costs more gas and more supply and i still don't feel like it deals more damage despite its type being converted to what would have been "normal". but yes, about the damage system in general - allow me to employ the roach as an example: a damage upgrade adds +2 damage. any defensive upgrade only adds +1. this used to be ok in sc:bw because there was such a thing as reduced damage due to size: if a goon shot a zergling, only 10+1 of his 20+2 damage was calculated against any armor values. this is no longer the case in s][c - there is no reduction of any kind anywhere. it may not make as much difference as it sounds: unless an un-upgraded roach shoots a +2 armored marine, it'll always require 3 shots. it gets a bit more dramatic when +3 roaches can always kill zerglings with 2 shots, and there's nothing the opponent can do about it. aforementioned zealot cannot pull this off due to split damage. but anyways, it is also the reason why "bigger" units fare so badly: with these quite high damage values on lower units, having a meager 1 base armor is just a slap in the face. tl;dr - yes, high dmg and relatively high hp on lower tiers is bawww | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
On April 05 2010 16:54 MavercK wrote: i agree heavily with OP in this thread and although no-ones going to listen to my post due to low post count (i've lurked for many years just never posted) i think roaches with an armor nerf. maybe even damage nerf. marauders with attack speed/damage nerf immortals... i think are fine. they are tech 2. extremly costly to mass. they seem fine. i know +50 damage is alot and they absolutely remove tanks amazing damage (unless your good with EMP) but yea. my 2 cents. i feel like this would reduce roaches to nice tanky units (although im still HEAVILY against zerg having a "tanky" unit except for ultras. it doesn't seem to fit zergs playstyle of heavy mapcontrol at all) marauders would be tank'ish supporting units. and immortals would stay the same i really feel they are fine. What are you talking about. The Lurker is pure map control unit. Banelings are supposed to be replacement but fail because they cost too much larvae to be effective. Roaches were modified to make Zerg more robust mid-game. A very short-sighted modification by Blizzard, if you ask me. In this respect, it needs to be modified in combination with other similar Tier units. Marauder attack speed/damage nerf would make them worse as support units. If you want an effective support unit, it must have negligible effectiveness on its own. So, lower hp, higher build time or gas cost. Immortals build too quickly for its damage and health. Build time should be balanced taking Chrono Boost into consideration to force Protoss to make a sacrifice in that respect. | ||
|
GhostFall
United States830 Posts
I wanna point out that SC2 tier 1 dynamics feels drastically different than SC1. Compare Marine/Firebat/Medic vs ling/Hydra vs Zealot/Goon from SC1 and Marine/Marauder/Reaper vs ling/Roach/Baneling vs Zealot/Sentry/Stalker. In SC1, every tier 1 unit feels different, has a unique role, and most importantly the roles are BALANCED. In SC2, not only does the roach fills a similar role as the marauder, but because the roach is so strong, it forces the terran to rely on the role the marauder fills, and thus becomes reliant on them. Balance changes are made with that playstyle in mind and that particular role is buffed. Similarly, none of the roles tier 1 protoss has is strong enough to reliably fight against roaches, so they tech up to immortals. And again, the role immortals fill becomes almost necessary and then balance changes are made based on that play style. So while the end result becomes balanced, the playstyles have all been drastically affected by roaches. And those play styles are what a lot of SC2 players feel is a little off. | ||
|
Daerthalus
Canada73 Posts
Immortals are not OP vs Zerg. Marauders are not OP vs Zerg either, but Immortals invalidate Terran Mech and Marauders are just way too good vs Protoss infantry. All of this stems from both races (T and P) need to counter Roaches. Despite that fact that I agree with the OP and would agree that a nerf to the roach should come with a nerf to the Marauder and Immortal, I still think that Terran's anti-armored tech should reside among it's Factory units. A not entirely original suggestion would be to switch Hellion and Marauders. Have the Marauders wield Flame throwers and the Hellions as rocket bikes. But I think that is beyond the scope of this post. | ||
|
MavercK
Australia2181 Posts
and i dunno i just feel roaches make zerg alot less mobile. but thats my feeling alone i guess. | ||
|
Azarkon
United States21060 Posts
On April 05 2010 16:50 patrick321 wrote: The rest of your supposed hard counters are merely duplications of a single theme: splash units deal very well with low hp units. When low hp units make up the bulk of two races' ground units, the situation is comparable. The key factor to understand is that in starcraft all of those low hp units are given superior speed to make up for their other shortcomings which enable them to beat your listed hard counters through superior micro. We don't frequently see this in mid to late game because as the army sizes grow it becomes increasingly difficult to apply the right micro and avoid the increased amount of area attacks. That doesn't stop us from seeing zealots surround and kill lurkers PvZ. Or oov surprising some terran with mid game mm before siege splash reached critical mass. Or forgg beating kal with mm + tank despite kal's awe inspiring reaver control (link). Heck, there used to be a micro ums map where you had to kill a reaver with 8 lings. I contend that the majority of starcraft units are merely soft counters to each other and nothing you have shown proves otherwise. I follow the pro-gaming scene quite closely and I do not have the same impression. Yes, exceptions happen, but exceptions do not prove the rule. Of course micro matters, but it's not the case that micro can simply make up for unit composition mistakes. Eight lings can defeat one reaver in exceptional circumstances, but in a straight-up micro battle between pros, reavers are a hard counter to mass lings and that's why people mix in ultras, defilers, mutas, etc. in late-game ZvP. Every once in a while you can kill off a reaver group with lings, but every once in a while progamers make huge blunders, too. That's not proof of anything. Personally, my definition of "soft counters" are things like emp vs. arbiters. EMP is clearly designed to be anti-arbiter (among other things) - it literally shuts down the arbiter's abilities. But this doesn't mean arbiters cannot be used when sci vessels are on the field. Rather, it becomes a matter of control - micro, as you said. But the harder the counter, the more difficult it is to micro your way out. Dragoons vs marines, for example, is far harder to deal with than emp vs. arbiters. But even that's not as hard of a counter as some of the things I've listed. I can't speak from experience as i don't have a sc2 key but from what i understand this isn't always the case in that game. The hard counters are actually one unit defeating another so thoroughly that no amount of micro will help; akin to firebats against golies in sc1. This kind of hard counter is something that should be minimized in most situations but isn't. But, again, i don't have the sc2 experience to confirm or deny that. Are you sure stimmed firebats can't defeat goliaths once in a while? As for SC 2, I don't find its counters are that different from SC 1. It's simply that certain units have no hard counters, and therefore gets used ALL THE TIME over units that do have hard counters. | ||
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
Roach: Much less damage, a bit fewer HPs, more regeneration. Go back to its role as a tank for other weaker zerg units, or as a microable harass unit with a unique mechanic. Since the regeneration forces the enemy to focus fire them, they shouldn't occur in very large numbers in huge battles and should cost 2 supply. Immortal: Much less damage, more shield. It should be more of a tank unit than an insane damage dealer. Protoss has other was of dealing damage, templars or colossi for example. This makes the Immortal kinda boring. Maybe give it some ability or an anti air attack to spice it up? Marauder: I'm not quite sure how to go about the marauder. Certainly reduce HPs, but by how much? What's certain for me is that whatever is stimmable infantry isn't supposed to have such an assload of health. Maybe make it much weaker overall, but also cheaper and more massable? The new role would then be support for marines or mech by means of slow. Still the same boring unit, but at least with a less central role. | ||
|
abyss
Czech Republic139 Posts
post it on blizzard forum | ||
|
NiGhT_mArE
United States35 Posts
Then experiment with balancing marauder dmg/armor dmg/range/supply count in relation to each other, as well as perhaps giving them something like splash damage, or SOMETHING cool. Finally experiment with lowering immortal +dmg to armor (but now this makes its OBVIOUS that its a stalker-like repeat, i think immortal needs SOMETHING else besides +armor dmg that gives it some pizzazz, but i have no idea what maybe a defensive ability though sentries already have powerful defensive spells) Oopps totally overlooked Scorch's post, but GMTA:D | ||
|
fspikec
United States30 Posts
Marauders and hellions need to switch roles. Marauders should have the short range fire weapons and hellions are the light armor rocket tanks (like the cobra in the previews for SC2.) As for protoss, kill the stalker and immortal, or make it more dragoon like. Every single Protoss player wants it back even if it still has bad AI. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
On April 05 2010 17:36 fspikec wrote: Am I the only one that wants roaches removed, hyrdas back down to their BW level, and lurkers brought back? Lurkers were fun and imaginative. Roaches are just plain boring. Marauders and hellions need to switch roles. Marauders should have the short range fire weapons and hellions are the light armor rocket tanks (like the cobra in the previews for SC2.) As for protoss, kill the stalker and immortal, or make it more dragoon like. Every single Protoss player wants it back even if it still has bad AI. Looks like the SC2 pro mod fits your bill. | ||
| ||
