EPTinsta vs. missile shot - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Oldboysctv
Canada58 Posts
| ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
On March 07 2011 06:36 Lennon wrote: That's a great point. Hydras need to be given smart-fire. They're useless versus Terran. Not just because of tanks; they're not all that good against bio either which is proven in this video. Except the video shows marines with instant fire vs marines wearing hydralisks for a halloween party and throwing hydra spines to stay in character. It's merely a comparison of instant fire vs projectiles; whether or not units with projectiles suck because of ONLY the projectiles or if there are other factors (hydras run so slooowwww) should be a separate discussion, i think. | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
The question is, whether this mechanism is too skewed and biased (i.e. more than blizzard originally intended). Compare the following scenario for example: - A Protoss player try to micro her/his 20 stalkers target firing, say, 10 mauraders by shift-clicking one by one - A Terran player try to micro her/his 20 marines target firing, say, 10 zealots. or, - A Zerg player try to micro her/his 10 roaches target firing bunch of scvs - A Terran player try to micro her/his 10 marines target firing bunch of probes Same effort (micro) by the player, but dramatically different outcome. How much difference can we attribute to "an intended feature"? In the second scenario, all 10 roaches will shoot one scv at a time (only 3 roach shots are needed to kill an scv), wasting the firepower of 7 roaches. Marines, on the other hand, will not waste any shot and shiftly move onto the next drone. By the time 10 roaches killed 2 scvs marines would have killed 10 drones. So Zerg players will ideally want to split her/his roaches into 3 groups and micro them separately. That's 3 times more effort required to achieve similar results (even then marines will come out on top no doubt in my mind) Fair? Intended feature? Get over it? I think the answers will differ per persons obviously and I don't have an opinion either way. | ||
|
Crisium
United States1618 Posts
On March 07 2011 00:21 Crisium wrote: ^Spine hits marine. The lack of overkill means that every marines shot hits (and does so instantly). While they are spines traveling in the air at a Marine, even enough to kill it, other Hydras will fire more spines and cause overkill. The problem is bigger than in SC1 because of smart targeting that prevents overkill. Terran have: Marines Reaper Ghost Tank (unseiged) Tank (seiged) Thor GtG Autoturret Planetary Fortress Protoss: Immortal (I think Sentry and Archon have delay, someone else confirm) Zerg: Baneling Infested Terran On March 07 2011 01:24 Raiznhell wrote: Dude....there's no real problem. Are you trying to say Terran is Imba because they have a lot of instant shot units? Because that would be as dumb as the other 50 billion lame accusations. Besides the Marauder has a missile shot and people still consider that unit broken and the Hydralisk does more DPS than the Marauder and hits Air. Join the many Zergs who have actually been making fantastic use of the Hydralisk in TvZ on the new ladder maps. I'm trying to list the units that have no overkill. I'm making no judgment on balance. | ||
|
hugman
Sweden4644 Posts
On March 07 2011 06:32 Fission wrote: It seems the prevailing opinion here is that the difference is caused by the difference in overkill mechanics. However, I'm not entirely sure about that. I strongly suspect the difference here is caused by the delay between the 1st marine shot volley hitting and the first spine volley hitting. This could result in a sort of snowballing effect which results in the large difference observed. I don't think that effect could be very large because the travel time of the spines is much shorter than the attack cooldown. In a 1vs1 between a marine and a "halloween hydra" the marine could survive depending on the order in which SC2 calculates things (and this could vary between encounters), because it's possible that the hydra will get its last spine off the same frame that it dies but it's also possible that the shot from the marine (that very same frame) will kill it before it attacks. Regardless of this though we have assumed that there is some amount of overkill going on, this means that whether or not the dying hydra gets its last spine off the marine it's shooting at will die anyway. Therefore it doesn't matter that the marine does damage x milliseconds faster, because it will not allow him to fire an extra time (again because the spine travel time is so much shorter than the attack cooldown) | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
Putting in overkill for instant fire units might not be a bad idea (if smart fire exists), honestly, but then projectiles and instant shot becomes only an aesthetics thing. | ||
|
Mephyss
Brazil128 Posts
I put 10 of them in a line with 10 burrowed zerglings and unburrowed ingame. On marine lane all 10 zerglings died on first shoot cycle. Hydras were taking 3 cycles to kill all zerglings (3 or 4 zerglings dying each cycle) and marauders were slowers with only 2 kills each cycle, 5 cycles to get all kills | ||
|
Fission
Canada1184 Posts
On March 07 2011 07:00 Mephyss wrote: I did a small test on map editor. changed marines, marauders and hydralisks stats to 50 damage (1 shot zerglings), 5 sec firerate (to check between hits easier) and 20 range (so they dont waste time moving to shoot). I put 10 of them in a line with 10 burrowed zerglings and unburrowed ingame. On marine lane all 10 zerglings died on first shoot cycle. Hydras were taking 3 cycles to kill all zerglings (3 or 4 zerglings dying each cycle) and marauders were slowers with only 2 kills each cycle, 5 cycles to get all kills Wow, nice work. Can you possibly make a video of this? It should be added to the OP, very significant. | ||
|
iPood
United States99 Posts
| ||
bkrow
Australia8532 Posts
On March 07 2011 06:50 Crisium wrote: I'm trying to list the units that have no overkill. I'm making no judgment on balance. While you may not intentionally be doing it - you are making a comment on balance  you are saying no overkill is a problem and that Terran has the most units that exploit this issue.. But that is a separate topic..Am i correct in saying that this post simply is a comparison between missile attacks and instant damage attacks? In which case i would always be expecting a difference - this is the versatility of the game.. My only concern would be if Blizzard didn't consider this in terms of balance; of which i think they would.. It's cool to see the comparison in a video though but i don't see it as completely surprising | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On March 07 2011 06:50 Crisium wrote: I'm trying to list the units that have no overkill. I'm making no judgment on balance. To make the list full: All melee units, Hellions, Sentries, Archons, Void Rays, Viking ground form, Mothership, PDD. Thors overkill somewhat, because of their delayed second attack and the slow animation means it takes a lot of time to change targets, even if they do not fire against the target. For example: a zergling gets in range of 5 thors, they will all acquire it as a target and start their attack animation. When the damage point is reached(it's set to 0.831 game seconds), 2 thors will fire. Only 1 thor is actually needed to kill the zergling, but since the second attack is delayed, 2 of them will fire to kill it instantly. The mothership similarly hits 6 times during one attack, making the no overkill on first shot almost useless, so you may as well not include it in the list. | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
On March 07 2011 07:03 iPood wrote: wow thats insane. Why would it being missile make a difference if the damage/shot delay is the same?? I don't get it... overkill mechanics is the only answer | ||
Grummler
Germany743 Posts
On March 07 2011 07:03 iPood wrote: wow thats insane. Why would it being missile make a difference if the damage/shot delay is the same?? I don't get it... Units with "instant shot" attack/hit only units that are alive. Units with "missle shot" also only attack units that are alive. BUT the targeted unit could die while the missle is on the way to its target. Then the missle/the attack does nothing and is wasted. The slower the actually missle moves, the worse it gets. Marauders for expample do overkill much mroe than hydras. But even with the fast hydra missles (read: needles) its a huge difference compared to an instant attack. | ||
|
MavercK
Australia2181 Posts
On March 07 2011 07:03 iPood wrote: wow thats insane. Why would it being missile make a difference if the damage/shot delay is the same?? I don't get it... because travel time means damage is wasted (infinite hydras will fire at that one marine with 1 hp because at the time of firing. that marine was still alive, marines however only 1 marine will fire because the damage is instant) people say tanks have "smart fire ai" they dont theres nothing smart theres no ai they just fire instantly but 1 at a time. it's just so fast you can't see it. this thread shocks me. i thought everyone knew this. this all seems like basic fundamental knowledge of the game. | ||
|
hugman
Sweden4644 Posts
| ||
|
navy
Canada197 Posts
theoretically then, couldnt fiendish micro equalize this as well, like if you selected groups of 3 hydras and targeted single marines, it could prevent overkill, although it would be ridculously difficult. The a move is also adding to the problem. | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
But such amazing micro (controling every single unit in your entire army for each and every single shot it fires so there is no overkill), is close to impossible. And even then, with this incredibly amazing impossible micro, you are only as good as attack moved marines. And yeah, the instant fire does make microing way way easier and more effective. When you stutterstep marines, each stop will kill a lot of lings for example, instead of overkilling the first ling in range. When you select all your marines, and tell them to target fire units by shift queuing attack orders on specific units, they focus fire perfectly with 0 overkill, its easy and super effective. If you do that with units that have projectiles, 90% of the time, since they end up overkilling so much, you are worse off than if you just attack moved. The only way to focus fire effectively with units that have a projectile, is to do it after selecting the exact number of units needed. But even then, if one of those dies, you end up having all of them firing off an extra round, thus again leading to massive overkill. So yeah, instant shot is incredible when attack moving, but it also makes all micro easier and more effective. | ||
|
Andreas
Norway214 Posts
| ||
|
whatthefat
United States918 Posts
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 you read the earlier parts of the thread, you'll see that that's not what happens. There is actually a small delay between each unit firing. Although it looks simultaneous in-game, it is not. With units that hit targets instantly such as marines, each unit takes into account the shots previously fired by the other units so there is no overkill. In the case of missile attacks, one unit may see an available target and fire on it, even though it has already been fired upon by another unit. The latter is visually quite obvious in-game, and is the cause of overkill. | ||
|
AssuredVacancy
United States1167 Posts
On March 07 2011 07:40 Andreas wrote: I think the one deceiving factor of this test is that all the units in the video are in range of each other from the beginning. This means the units with missile attacks are bound to have the AI screw it up for them. If you placed the units farther apart so there'd be a concave of both units, the result would probably be much closer and more realistic compared to what usually happens in-game. No it would be worse as the hydras would aquire the nearest marine that comes in range and massively overkill. If they start next to each other there would as least be some differentiation in target aquired. | ||
| ||
