|
On March 07 2011 04:38 usethis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 04:33 Nakama wrote:
YES it is a big diffrence but thats a good thing in my opinion and i think blizz did it on purpose.
Its just another varibale u can use to balance the game wich is, like most things, good and bad at once cause u also HAVE to balance it.
U cant just let 25 marines fight vs 25 hydras and then say its op or even draw any conclusion out of it without looking at the whole context.
back to OP : Asking if there shall be a diffrence betwenn isntant and missle shot is like asking someone shall i go right or left wihtout saying him where ur goal is I think you do understand the topic but are confused at the same time. ANYONE will take instant over missile given choice, period. It just happens that Terran has most of these instant fire units, most notably the marines. And some (many?) people think the marines are OP. And this instant shot mechanism obviously is what makes marines so strong. That's why it's brought up to people's attention.
I want to point out that Melee units don't overkill either.
|
On March 07 2011 04:33 Nakama wrote:
YES it is a big diffrence but thats a good thing in my opinion and i think blizz did it on purpose.
Its just another varibale u can use to balance the game wich is, like most things, good and bad at once cause u also HAVE to balance it.
U cant just let 25 marines fight vs 25 hydras and then say its op or even draw any conclusion out of it without looking at the whole context.
back to OP : Asking if there shall be a diffrence betwenn isntant and missle shot is like asking someone shall i go right or left wihtout saying him where ur goal is
The problem with this reasoning is that FortuneSyn wasn't comparing Hydralisks and Marines, nor was he implying that Hydralisk vs. Marine was imbalanced. He was comparing instant shots and missile shots. The Hydralisks in that video had their stats adjusted to mirror those of the Marine, and in the battle, the insta-shot Marines steamrolled the missile-shot Marines (the ones with Hydralisk SKINS, not actual Hydralisks). The conclusion from the video in the OP is that units with instant shots have a drastic advantage over missile units, and that perhaps that advantage should be adjusted. If there isn't enough context to reach that conclusion, I'm not sure what else you need.
It's true that attack animations simply constitute one of many variables within StarCraft II, but I believe the OP's goal was to discuss whether that variable is too volatile and if it should be readdressed by Blizzard.
And by the way, I confess I don't understand your "right or left" analogy at all. Care to elaborate?
|
On March 07 2011 04:43 KevinIX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 04:38 usethis2 wrote:On March 07 2011 04:33 Nakama wrote:
YES it is a big diffrence but thats a good thing in my opinion and i think blizz did it on purpose.
Its just another varibale u can use to balance the game wich is, like most things, good and bad at once cause u also HAVE to balance it.
U cant just let 25 marines fight vs 25 hydras and then say its op or even draw any conclusion out of it without looking at the whole context.
back to OP : Asking if there shall be a diffrence betwenn isntant and missle shot is like asking someone shall i go right or left wihtout saying him where ur goal is I think you do understand the topic but are confused at the same time. ANYONE will take instant over missile given choice, period. It just happens that Terran has most of these instant fire units, most notably the marines. And some (many?) people think the marines are OP. And this instant shot mechanism obviously is what makes marines so strong. That's why it's brought up to people's attention. I want to point out that Melee units don't overkill either.
I think this is made up for by the lack of range, and the travel time between targets when engaging.
|
On March 07 2011 04:48 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 04:43 KevinIX wrote:On March 07 2011 04:38 usethis2 wrote:On March 07 2011 04:33 Nakama wrote:
YES it is a big diffrence but thats a good thing in my opinion and i think blizz did it on purpose.
Its just another varibale u can use to balance the game wich is, like most things, good and bad at once cause u also HAVE to balance it.
U cant just let 25 marines fight vs 25 hydras and then say its op or even draw any conclusion out of it without looking at the whole context.
back to OP : Asking if there shall be a diffrence betwenn isntant and missle shot is like asking someone shall i go right or left wihtout saying him where ur goal is I think you do understand the topic but are confused at the same time. ANYONE will take instant over missile given choice, period. It just happens that Terran has most of these instant fire units, most notably the marines. And some (many?) people think the marines are OP. And this instant shot mechanism obviously is what makes marines so strong. That's why it's brought up to people's attention. I want to point out that Melee units don't overkill either. I think this is made up for by the lack of range, and the travel time between targets when engaging.
exactly, it'd be completely worthless if melee units had attach animations that lasted like, 10 seconds, couldn't be interrupted, and would overkill a target.
the reason siege tanks overkill is b/c they don't all fire at the same time, i saw in an interview once that there was a 1/16th second delay btw siege shots if they're all in a line, to help keep the total attack from melting computers' faces
|
I did some tests, 3 runs each of just a moving 20 hydras into 40 marines, and 20 hydras into 10 immortals. In one set I ran +1 attack and in the other set I ran +1 armor and in both cases +1 armor was a better result. So I'm starting to think that for a projectile unit your always better off to get armor over weapons because Hydra V Immortal would have been the one case where I would have definitely figured weapon upgrades would have been superior but due to the way projectiles work even that isn't the case apparently.
It was something like:
+1 weapons
vMarines- 7 hydras left
vImmortal- 1 Immortal left( with low hp usually )
+1 armor
vMarines- 12 hydras left
vImmortals- 2-4 hydras left
|
On March 07 2011 04:44 Aeres wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 04:33 Nakama wrote:
YES it is a big diffrence but thats a good thing in my opinion and i think blizz did it on purpose.
Its just another varibale u can use to balance the game wich is, like most things, good and bad at once cause u also HAVE to balance it.
U cant just let 25 marines fight vs 25 hydras and then say its op or even draw any conclusion out of it without looking at the whole context.
back to OP : Asking if there shall be a diffrence betwenn isntant and missle shot is like asking someone shall i go right or left wihtout saying him where ur goal is It's true that attack animations simply constitute one of many variables within StarCraft II, but I believe the OP's goal was to discuss whether that variable is too volatile and if it should be readdressed by Blizzard.
Exactly.
I don't think anyone expected the lack of overkill to be on par with +3 attack
|
On March 07 2011 04:54 Synk wrote:
I did some tests, 3 runs each of just a moving 20 hydras into 40 marines, and 20 hydras into 10 immortals. In one set I ran +1 attack and in the other set I ran +1 armor and in both cases +1 armor was a better result. So I'm starting to think that for a projectile unit your always better off to get armor over weapons because Hydra V Immortal would have been the one case where I would have definitely figured weapon upgrades would have been superior but due to the way projectiles work even that isn't the case apparently.
It was something like:
+1 weapons
vMarines- 7 hydras left
vImmortal- 1 Immortal left( with low hp usually )
+1 armor
vMarines- 12 hydras left
vImmortals- 2-4 hydras left
Were the stats the same between all units? Or did you use the "actual" marine and hydra?
|
On March 07 2011 02:17 thesideshow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 01:54 FarbrorAbavna wrote:On March 07 2011 00:03 hugman wrote:On March 06 2011 23:56 FarbrorAbavna wrote:
If I take one hydra and one marine(both unupgraded) and pit them against each other, the hydra will come out on top. Almost to the point of being ridiculous. Should there really be that big a difference in the game between instant and missile shot?
These videos are as silly now just as they were back in the beta when you would see one pop up almost every day. They dont really prove anything and just waste peoples time. Not to berate you in any way but it's more or less why you dont see them any more. Most have realised that the only true way to see something as op or not is through testing the units out in real battle conditions not in a vacuum like in this video. These are not HydralisksThey are Marines with the Hydralisk model and attack animation Wow I'm fucking stupid, I completely missed the obvious. Sorry op! Regarding the matter, as long as the units arent exact copies of each other(where the only discerning factor is one has instant hit and the other has missiles) there are other factors at work to balance out instant vs missile shot. So even though the results of the op's work points to instant being in favor it is still a very specific situation and as such only tells us instant is better. Nothing more nothing less. What are the other factors?
First thing that comes to mind is race mechanics, if one unit is zerg and the other terran then how the unit is built and the path to get the tech are things that balance them out. Other things are different stats(hp, move speed, range etc). I'm of course not talking about the situation in the op since that situation doesnt apply to the game really(two identical units that only has one single thing to tell them appart, it doesnt exist  ).
|
Canada741 Posts
The difference is probably due to overkill shots. Wasted hydra shots = no more marines dying.
|
Were the stats the same between all units? Or did you use the "actual" marine and hydra?
This is irrelevant as I'm comparing the benefit of the two upgrades for a projectile unit, not how well hydras perform. All things were kept equal between both tests though aside from +1 wep and +1 armor upgrades.
|
On March 07 2011 05:00 Synk wrote:Show nested quote +Were the stats the same between all units? Or did you use the "actual" marine and hydra? This is irrelevant as I'm comparing the benefit of the two upgrades for a projectile unit, not how well hydras perform. All things were kept equal between both tests though aside from +1 wep and +1 armor upgrades.
No, you're wrong.
Marines do 6 damage, so an armor upgrade reduces their dps by 17% whereas an attack upgrade for Hydras increases their DPS by 8%.
Against Immortals the attack upg. does nothing against the hardened shield which is 33% of the Immortal's life.
This means the upgrades are not equal, regardless of projectile or hitscan. You haven't isolated the variable you're trying to study.
|
On March 07 2011 04:54 Synk wrote:
I did some tests, 3 runs each of just a moving 20 hydras into 40 marines, and 20 hydras into 10 immortals. In one set I ran +1 attack and in the other set I ran +1 armor and in both cases +1 armor was a better result. So I'm starting to think that for a projectile unit your always better off to get armor over weapons because Hydra V Immortal would have been the one case where I would have definitely figured weapon upgrades would have been superior but due to the way projectiles work even that isn't the case apparently.
It was something like:
+1 weapons
vMarines- 7 hydras left
vImmortal- 1 Immortal left( with low hp usually )
+1 armor
vMarines- 12 hydras left
vImmortals- 2-4 hydras left
what, with the exact same settings from the op?
because you know, a marine at 45/55hp would take 4/5 shots from a hydra to die, and 3/5 shots from a +1 hydra, saving at most 1 salvo (0.83s per marine)
while a marine would take 14 shots to kill a hydra, and 17 shots to kill a +1 armor hydra, costing 3 shots (3x0.86 = 2.58s)
So even ignoring projectiles and overkill, +1 armor trumps +1 attack in hydra vs marine
|
On March 07 2011 04:54 Synk wrote:
I did some tests, 3 runs each of just a moving 20 hydras into 40 marines, and 20 hydras into 10 immortals. In one set I ran +1 attack and in the other set I ran +1 armor and in both cases +1 armor was a better result. So I'm starting to think that for a projectile unit your always better off to get armor over weapons because Hydra V Immortal would have been the one case where I would have definitely figured weapon upgrades would have been superior but due to the way projectiles work even that isn't the case apparently.
It was something like:
+1 weapons
vMarines- 7 hydras left
vImmortal- 1 Immortal left( with low hp usually )
+1 armor
vMarines- 12 hydras left
vImmortals- 2-4 hydras left
Why not just do the math on +1 armor vs +1 weapons?
With +1 weapons, hydras kill marines in the exact same number of hits as without +1 weapons. Against immortals, hydras kill in 26 shots instead of 27 (assuming no shield regen).
With +1 armor, marines kill hydras in 17 shots (typically; health regen can change it a little), but without armor it takes 14. Against immotals, 4 shots without armor, 5 with.
This has nothing to do with projectile vs instant, there's just a much larger % of hits needed to kill change when you get +1 armor in these cases, so it is more effective.
|
This results does not make any sense mathematically.
If all enemy units are in range of all units and marines start attacking at the very same momment - and there is no reason to believe otherwise - and hit at the very same momment, then they should logically overkill.
Only possible way to explain this is that Hydra projectile is slower that attack cooldown, or that there is some sort of smart targeting.
It should be possible to see this in smaller groups - in 8vs8 test, both groups should be equal, otherwise it means that there is some kind of smart targeting. Mathematically there is no other way to explain it.
Maybe there is something in game Blizzard dont know about
|
Yea, just check my sig I guess I'm done with this thread, take a useful piece of info if you want it. If you can't understand the test I did then I guess you don't deserve to benefit from it.
|
On March 07 2011 05:11 Sek-Kuar wrote:This results does not make any sense mathematically. If all enemy units are in range of all units and marines start attacking at the very same momment - and there is no reason to believe otherwise - and hit at the very same momment, then they should logically overkill. Only possible way to explain this is that Hydra projectile is slower that attack cooldown, or that there is some sort of smart targeting. It should be possible to see this in smaller groups - in 8vs8 test, both groups should be equal, otherwise it means that there is some kind of smart targeting. Mathematically there is no other way to explain it. Maybe there is something in game Blizzard dont know about
If someone can test marine overkill - scan a 1hp obs in a ball of marines and see how many marines fire.
then mod the marine atk speed to a large number and do this next one:
have a 1hp obs and a 400hp obs above a ball of marines. scan, and see how much damage the 400hp obs takes in the salvo. if it isnt the number of marines - the one that should have taken out the 1hp obs, then marines overkill. if it is only missing the damage from 1 marine, then marines dont overkill.
On March 07 2011 05:14 Synk wrote:
Yea, just check my sig I guess I'm done with this thread, take a useful piece of info if you want it. If you can't understand the test I did then I guess you don't deserve to benefit from it.
except you test does NOT set things equal... unlike the OP
unless you tell us "My hydras were the same hp and damage as the marines, and I tested the armor vs attack upgrades, and i did this with varying hp/damage considerations so it isnt just for one specific scenario," then you can absolutely say projectile using units should upgrade armor.
|
this is pretty cool... had never really thought of the instant vs missile shot debate... only time ive really thought of it is immortals vs stalker where they cant blink away from a immo shot
|
On March 07 2011 05:15 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 05:11 Sek-Kuar wrote:This results does not make any sense mathematically. If all enemy units are in range of all units and marines start attacking at the very same momment - and there is no reason to believe otherwise - and hit at the very same momment, then they should logically overkill. Only possible way to explain this is that Hydra projectile is slower that attack cooldown, or that there is some sort of smart targeting. It should be possible to see this in smaller groups - in 8vs8 test, both groups should be equal, otherwise it means that there is some kind of smart targeting. Mathematically there is no other way to explain it. Maybe there is something in game Blizzard dont know about If someone can test marine overkill - scan a 1hp obs in a ball of marines and see how many marines fire. then mod the marine atk speed to a large number and do this next one: have a 1hp obs and a 400hp obs above a ball of marines. scan, and see how much damage the 400hp obs takes in the salvo. if it isnt the number of marines - the one that should have taken out the 1hp obs, then marines overkill. if it is only missing the damage from 1 marine, then marines dont overkill.
This is actually great test, but not for what you mean. Insta shoot can not mathematically explain lack of overkill.
But if you have group of marines, half of them is close to low HP observer, and second half is close to high HP observer, then after scan they should instantly all at the same time attack closer target...
So if what Dustin said is true, there *should* be over kill. If there is not, then some kind of smart targeting is in game.
Just presence of "insta shooting" can not explain absence of overkill.
|
On March 07 2011 05:21 Sek-Kuar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2011 05:15 JinDesu wrote:On March 07 2011 05:11 Sek-Kuar wrote:This results does not make any sense mathematically. If all enemy units are in range of all units and marines start attacking at the very same momment - and there is no reason to believe otherwise - and hit at the very same momment, then they should logically overkill. Only possible way to explain this is that Hydra projectile is slower that attack cooldown, or that there is some sort of smart targeting. It should be possible to see this in smaller groups - in 8vs8 test, both groups should be equal, otherwise it means that there is some kind of smart targeting. Mathematically there is no other way to explain it. Maybe there is something in game Blizzard dont know about If someone can test marine overkill - scan a 1hp obs in a ball of marines and see how many marines fire. then mod the marine atk speed to a large number and do this next one: have a 1hp obs and a 400hp obs above a ball of marines. scan, and see how much damage the 400hp obs takes in the salvo. if it isnt the number of marines - the one that should have taken out the 1hp obs, then marines overkill. if it is only missing the damage from 1 marine, then marines dont overkill. This is actually great test, but not for what you mean. Insta shoot can not mathematically explain lack of overkill. But if you have group of marines, half of them is close to low HP observer, and second half is close to high HP observer, then after scan they should instantly all at the same time attack closer target... So if what Dustin said is true, there *should* be over kill. If there is not, then some kind of smart targeting is in game. Just presence of "insta shooting" can not explain absence of overkill.
I was more thinking of the AI in this matter. The referred to "smart AI" of tanks would select units to attack and not to attack. Using this test, we would know if marines overkill or not.
Howver, you are right; insta-shoot does not guarantee unless we know that all insta-shoot units use the "smart AI". and the only way to find out is to test every insta-shoot unit.
|
On March 07 2011 05:00 Synk wrote:Show nested quote +Were the stats the same between all units? Or did you use the "actual" marine and hydra? This is irrelevant as I'm comparing the benefit of the two upgrades for a projectile unit, not how well hydras perform. All things were kept equal between both tests though aside from +1 wep and +1 armor upgrades.
On March 07 2011 05:14 Synk wrote:
Yea, just check my sig I guess I'm done with this thread, take a useful piece of info if you want it. If you can't understand the test I did then I guess you don't deserve to benefit from it.
Butthurt much? You specifically say that you want to test how well projectile units perform, NOT the hydra, and then you do a test that accomplishes the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
