The Philosophy of Single Target Spells - Page 4

tentaclemonster

United States118 Posts

May 25 2010 04:26 GMT

#61

Good writeup. Shame that the simple concept you covered is completely lost on the bliz balance team-another sign that they have no idea what they are doing.

Wolfpox

Canada164 Posts

May 25 2010 13:51 GMT

#62

Adding abilities that have such a simple function is the problem -- whether they target one unit, an area, or whatever, the key is whether or not it makes the game interesting. These abilities are useful but they don't make it interesting

Svetz

Australia311 Posts

May 25 2010 14:17 GMT

#63

I don't really understand, people are complaining that it's too much of an APM hit to multicast single target spells, and yet theres another incredibly long post about how theres not enough tricks in sc2 to differentiate between pro's and your average diamond player.
Surely abilities like frenzy and corruption are perfect for this, there not game breaking enough so your going to automatically lose because you don't have the spare APM for them, but it's also something which could give a better player an edge.

If you have a big army fight and you manage to corrupt all their large units at the same time as getting a fungal growth down and focus firing you could win a fight you would have otherwise lost, isn't that exactly what everyone wants? To be able to see people win otherwise uneven battles through pure skill. Yes it's difficult, and for average diamond'ers you'd probably be better off macro'ing back at your base, but we need things to differentiate between the average players and the ones who have the APM to spare.

Severedevil

United States4832 Posts

May 25 2010 14:34 GMT

#64

Frenzy should not be a minor, single-target buff. Frenzy should not be a minor, multi-target buff. Starcraft is not a game of minor buffs.

A Frenzy ability should do something like: these units over here do DOUBLE DAMAGE or are REALLY HARD TO KILL and possibly MOVE FUCKING FAST + CANNOT BE SLOWED DOWN but also DIE IN TEN SECONDS. Now you have a terrifying spell that won't be used lightly but can compete for energy with plaguesnare (and synergizes with it, since the enemy units can't run away anymore). For a better targeting mechanism, have the infestor instead lay down a temporary cloud of crazy-gas such that any Zerg units who enter the cloud go into a frenzy. Done.

As for corrupt... throw that shit away. If you want to use corrupters against ground, morph them into guardians. If it's necessary for Feedback to work against corrupters (to keep them from murdering Colossus, since Protoss vs. air units kill corrupters pretty slowly) then just make Feedback stun biological units.

YourRoleModel

United States11 Posts

May 25 2010 14:48 GMT

#65

Is it really all that hard to have a group of corruptors hotkeyed and Shift-Cast Corruption at the group of Battlecruisers that just attacked your expansion in a 2-2? Combined with Mutas, it seemed to me that BCs fell incredibly fast when corrupted compared to not.

It's no different than shift-casting Yamato or shift casting force field or shift casting storm.

You're already attack moving the corruptors at the enemy units they can hit... why not queue up mass corruption and benefit from all that extra damage for that whole fight?

Even if the spell is more applicable to 2v2 on Twighlight Fortress or FFAs or whatnot, it seemed to me that the spell was useful and effective.

sLiniss

United States849 Posts

May 25 2010 14:59 GMT

#66

It's just Blizzard trying to get ultras to be better. I think a significant difference is the auto-cast in WC3. I haven't used the frenzy spell since I find fungal to be much better, but yeah... unless its autocast I don't think it'll be that great.

Prev 1 2 3 4 All

Please or register to reply.

The Philosophy of Single Target Spells - Page 4

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming