all hydra stats (collision size, hp, attack dmg and shot delays) were tweaked to match the marine. The only difference between the 2 in this video is that the hydra shoots a missile, the marine shoots instantly.
The result? Marines destroy the hydras by a ridiculous amount. The fight is equal when hydras are given +3 attack.
This video does NOT show that hydras are weak or that marines are OP. This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have. Should there really be that big a difference in the game between instant and missile shot?
Probably true, there's a lot of imbalance in the core mechanics. I don't think Hydras will be overall good unless they get serious buffs. Just in movement speed would be nice, if they could reach attack range quicker, their higher DPS would come in to effect, and they wouldn't be committed off creep. So much for Zerg's mobility..
i think even using hydras is gonna derail the discussion because 50% of replys wont read the part about hp and attack dps so this should be a fun thread.
its true there is an advantage to instant attacks, but i think it should just considered a stat like any other, if projectile speed was displayed on the weapon icon people would more readily count it among the stats such as attack speed and damage.
Not bad video, ofcourse it allmost never happens that hidra will fight like that vs marines ( no1 will even make those in zvt). But i always thought that marine is a bit too much cost-effective...
Just visualize how easily goliaths or marines clear minefields, and then compare that to dragoons.
The difference is, mainly, that units die slightly faster (a killing blow from a marine kills the enemy unit instantly and the unit cannot fire its own attack, whereas a killing blow from a hydra allows a time window for the enemy unit to get off one more attack) and the mitigation of overkilling blows.
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.
I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
On March 06 2011 23:50 FortuneSyn wrote: Should there really be that big a difference in the game between instant and missile shot?
Cool video (although I couldn't read any of it)
Well, I think the very fact that the designers can make a spell/ attack instant or missile (or even able to be dodged) is an added mechanic that allows for versatility and better buffing/ nerfing abilities.
If there's a specific match-up that's proven to be broken because of this, there are a multitude of variables that could be slightly tweaked (including this).
I don't see a direct problem with it in any specific case though. It's just an interesting thing you pointed out.
Wow that is really a huge difference. And that's with the units starting right next to each other. It would probably be an even bigger difference if they started at maximum range.
Well it'll be much closer if you choose a unit with slower attack speed. At this example , marine attack speed is too high so they get extra shots while Hydra missile shot are on fly. So actually this is one of the extreme scenarios you can create.
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 Hydralisks They are Marines with the Hydralisk model and attack animation
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
while it does look like the marines all shot at the exact same time, they actualy shoot with miniscule delays to each other, since there damage is instand and a marine kills the target the next will not "waste" his damage on a allready dead target. the hydras do not have that, there attack is a missile and you can fire 50 Missiles that each do 1 million damage on a target that has 1 hp left, the first will kill it, the rest will evaporate.
it is also one of the main reasons that stalkers perform sub-par and the only thing preventing the Marauder getting hit with a nerf-bat.
The video is really portraying the very worst case - it even syncs up all the hydra shots (they all shoot at exactly the same time since they are all in range of enemies from start to finish). It'd probably already be much less of a deal if the unit groups walked towards each other before fighting instead of spawning the way they do in the video.
On March 06 2011 23:58 Nis wrote: I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
I thought there was AI to prefent overkill, or does that only apply to siege tanks?
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
while it does look like the marines all shot at the exact same time, they actualy shoot with miniscule delays to each other, since there damage is instand and a marine kills the target the next will not "waste" his damage on a allready dead target. the hydras do not have that, there attack is a missile and you can fire 50 Missiles that each do 1 million damage on a target that has 1 hp left, the first will kill it, the rest will evaporate.
it is also one of the main reasons that stalkers perform sub-par.
Actually there is no wasted damage in this case , you know all the stats are same expect damage type . The difference is total attack time for all marines are much higher than total attack time for hydras as marines can keep doing damage while hydra projectile travel.
For a better example , imagine both having 20 range and attacking each other at maximum range. Marines will be much much powerful as projectile travel time is higher.
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
while it does look like the marines all shot at the exact same time, they actualy shoot with miniscule delays to each other, since there damage is instand and a marine kills the target the next will not "waste" his damage on a allready dead target. the hydras do not have that, there attack is a missile and you can fire 50 Missiles that each do 1 million damage on a target that has 1 hp left, the first will kill it, the rest will evaporate.
it is also one of the main reasons that stalkers perform sub-par.
Actually there is no wasted damage in this case , you know all the stats are same expect damage type . The difference is total attack time for all marines are much higher than total attack time for hydras as marines can keep doing damage while hydra projectile travel.
For a better example , imagine both having 20 range and attacking each other at maximum range. Marines will be much much powerful as projectile travel time is higher.
No, you're wrong, he's right. The actual flight time of the missile doesn't affect DPS in a long fight, as it only adds the flight time of the first missile to the overall time of the fight. The attack delay is from when a missile is fired, not from when a missile hits. It DOES end up affecting DPS because of overkill.
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
while it does look like the marines all shot at the exact same time, they actualy shoot with miniscule delays to each other, since there damage is instand and a marine kills the target the next will not "waste" his damage on a allready dead target. the hydras do not have that, there attack is a missile and you can fire 50 Missiles that each do 1 million damage on a target that has 1 hp left, the first will kill it, the rest will evaporate.
it is also one of the main reasons that stalkers perform sub-par.
Actually there is no wasted damage in this case , you know all the stats are same expect damage type . The difference is total attack time for all marines are much higher than total attack time for hydras as marines can keep doing damage while hydra projectile travel.
For a better example , imagine both having 20 range and attacking each other at maximum range. Marines will be much much powerful as projectile travel time is higher.
No, you're wrong, he's right. The actual flight time of the missile doesn't affect DPS in a long fight, as it only adds the flight time of the first missile to the overall time of the fight. The attack delay is from when a missile is fired, not from when a missile hits. It DOES end up affecting DPS because of overkill.
I didn't said flight time effects dps , I said marine damage applied instantly while hydra damage is delayed , so in this delay , marine keeps doing damage to other stuff.
Extreme examples should make it easy ; lets say 1 hydra vs 1 marine ; both has 1 HP and both gonna shoot 1 seconds later. Also both attack every 0.25 seconds after that. Right after 1 second , Hydra will die instantly ; but marine will die at 1.5s ( travel time ) which gives him 2 extra shots. ( 0.5 / 0.25 )
Isnt it totally natural and normal that instant-shoot units win? In the moment were the Hydralisks do dmg there are already some of them dead obviously. So in 2nd shot there are already more marines. This continues to get exponentially worse for hydralisks.
And now add even the "overkill prevention" in sc2 to this. Every sane person should expect this result.
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
Good luck with trying to avoid the balance discussion though
not really contributing to the topic per se, but they always fired spines. they were just invisible in brood war. the green slime wasn't actually the attack projectile, it was, spine lubricant or something i guess.
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)
I always knew the way marines distribute their damage is one of their greatest strengths. How much of a difference it actually makes surprises me though. Can you imagine how much it would change balance if tank shots were a projectile and they would start overkilling like in Broodwar?
Hydras are terrible; is this a surprise to anyone? They're basically cost-ineffective, slow, expensive marines.
And yes, they have more DPS than a marine, but two marines > one hydra and those two marines cost less, use no gas, and don't rely on larva.
User was warned for this post
Edit: I understand the post wasn't specific to hydras, but because hydras follow this attack pattern without the armor and cheapness of roaches (who also use missile attacks), I thought it was pertinent to talk about hydras themselves. I guess not.
Yeah. This is because say you have 10 hydra and 10 marines
A marine will have 5 hp, and a hydra does 5 damage.
But since hydra fire missiles without smart fire, like 3-4 hydra might try to fire on that marine at the same time, meaning 3/4 of their damage for that attack timing is wasted.
If a hydra is at 5 hp, the game will only allow a single marine to fire at that instance, and instantly tell the other 3 marines to shoot other targets.
On March 07 2011 00:24 mikell wrote: I don't see any real reason why hydras don't have their acid spit insta attack like BW.
Balancing, perhaps. They were ridiculously powerful at 90hp and .75 delay. At 80hp and .83 delay they are still good against Protoss. Without overkill they would destroy Gateway units.
The hydralisks probably decided that creating holes in their enemies were more of a torture than melting them down with acid. Then again, shouldn't the spines from a hydralisk be instant shot as well? They seem to travel as fast as a bullet, except on scale.
On March 06 2011 23:56 Zalias wrote: Not bad video, ofcourse it allmost never happens that hidra will fight like that vs marines ( no1 will even make those in zvt). But i always thought that marine is a bit too much cost-effective...
Please realise that hydras DO beat marines, because they dont deal the same dmg as in the video. The video is to demonstrate the power of instant vs missle attacks. Its not for the casual zerg do start another QQ imba thread.
The video shows two equal units with 100% equal stats, but one of them has a missle, the other one an instant atack. It coincedently just happens to be a marine and a hydra graphic modell. Immortal (without shields and stuff) vs marauder would be the same. Maybe even worse, cause the marauders missle are much slower than the hydras.
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
while it does look like the marines all shot at the exact same time, they actualy shoot with miniscule delays to each other, since there damage is instand and a marine kills the target the next will not "waste" his damage on a allready dead target. the hydras do not have that, there attack is a missile and you can fire 50 Missiles that each do 1 million damage on a target that has 1 hp left, the first will kill it, the rest will evaporate.
it is also one of the main reasons that stalkers perform sub-par.
Actually there is no wasted damage in this case , you know all the stats are same expect damage type . The difference is total attack time for all marines are much higher than total attack time for hydras as marines can keep doing damage while hydra projectile travel.
For a better example , imagine both having 20 range and attacking each other at maximum range. Marines will be much much powerful as projectile travel time is higher.
No, you're wrong, he's right. The actual flight time of the missile doesn't affect DPS in a long fight, as it only adds the flight time of the first missile to the overall time of the fight. The attack delay is from when a missile is fired, not from when a missile hits. It DOES end up affecting DPS because of overkill.
I didn't said flight time effects dps , I said marine damage applied instantly while hydra damage is delayed , so in this delay , marine keeps doing damage to other stuff.
Extreme examples should make it easy ; lets say 1 hydra vs 1 marine ; both has 1 HP and both gonna shoot 1 seconds later. Also both attack every 0.25 seconds after that. Right after 1 second , Hydra will die instantly ; but marine will die at 1.5s ( travel time ) which gives him 2 extra shots. ( 0.5 / 0.25 )
You haven't thought it through properly. First of all, your example is bad because the flight time is longer than attack cooldown which introduces an overkill in 1vs1 fights that doesn't actually exist in game. Secondly, it's true that the first marine will die at 1.5s but the SECOND marine would die at 2.5s. The missile flight time is an OFFSET not a delay that stacks with each attack. There is, however, an overkill effect resulting from there being multiple hydras shooting the same target. THAT is what's behind the results.
On March 07 2011 00:26 Mailing wrote: Yeah. This is because say you have 10 hydra and 10 marines
A marine will have 5 hp, and a hydra does 5 damage.
But since hydra fire missiles without smart fire, like 3-4 hydra might try to fire on that marine at the same time, meaning 3/4 of their damage for that attack timing is wasted.
If a hydra is at 5 hp, the game will only allow a single marine to fire at that instance, and instantly tell the other 3 marines to shoot other targets.
It's a super big part of siege tank fire
Are you guys sure about Hydra not having smart fire? I really doubt it to be honest , I thought no units in Sc2 can overkill.
There is an easy way to test this if anyone is volunteered. Put 10 hydras one side , grouped. 2 marines to other side , one is very close to hydras and other is a littler far but also in range of all hydras. Start combat and let hydras only shoot once , if 2nd marine is undamaged , then yes damage system doesnt works as I thought and hydras overkill.
hugman - As I said , I thought AI doesnt attack a unit if delayed damage is higher than units current hp. Are you really sure that is wrong? Just to be clear , I'm not claiming anything , just asking
Blizzard is so bad at balancing the hydra. This unit is so fragile and one-dimensional that is easily countered by 80% of Terran's army. And does too well of a job against gateway units until colossus comes out. Honestly, they just deal too much damage against certain units and have too little HP to deal with other units. And more often times than not, there are units that abuse the fact that Hydras have very little HP and thus Hydras aren't seen as often.
Though to be fair, Hydras were generally mediocre against Terran in SC1 anyways. Marines and tanks were still super effective against hydras, though the pathing + instant shots from Hydras didn't make it nearly this bad in SC2, and Hydras did decent against Terran mech in SC1 whereas that's not even close to SC2. In fact, it's hard to find any Terran standard army composition that doesn't do well against hydras in SC2.
yeah that's the benefit of hitscan. i really don't know why they decided to make hitscan attacks and only give them to one race. as hitscan is always going to be more efficient than projectiles.
i'm not really complaining about that since my race does have those baneling and infestor things that tend to be very handy against marines, but i do think that they should have had some more consistency in their unit design. i think that everything should have been a projectile. speed of the projectile can vary of course, but everything should be a projectile to allow for some wasted fire, and i've thought this for a long time.
back in the days when one siege tank could kill an entire zerg 200/200 army, i suggested that tank shots be made a fast moving projectile. this would, in effect, make them less effective at maximum range, and become more effective the closer the opposing army got. that way an opposing army could actually approach them, but they could still hold their own once the army got within fighting range.
the main difference is that in this example the marine's first round of attacks occurs before the hydralisk attack lands, ergo hydralisk will die first and the side will less units will inevitably have lower dps. the overkill is negligable because the shot animation is a fraction of a second.
the regular hydralisk is weak against marines because of the ineffective dps concave due to having a larger collision radius. they're still suped-up marines, and should get the first volley of shots due to the range upgrade.
personally i think the best way to 'balance' marines would be to increase collision radius. it's not really logical when you see at a big swarm of marines... how they're meant to effectively target and shoot an enemy in the sardine formation is beyond me... they make the spartan formation look like the great victoria desert.
This is weird because I just did like 10+ tests of 24 hydra vs 24 marines and hydra always win by a large margin. And even when I testes 48 marines vs 24 hydra, hydra can still kills half of the marines before dying. I don't really understand how 24 hydra can lose to 24 marines.
On March 07 2011 00:37 canikizu wrote: This is weird because I just did like 10+ tests of 24 hydra vs 24 marines and hydra always win by a large margin. And even when I testes 48 marines vs 24 hydra, hydra can still kills half of the marines before dying. I don't really understand how 24 hydra can lose to 24 marines.
This test is not marine v hydra. Rather marine with instant hits v marine with missile attack. Marine with missile attack happen to wear hydra outfit. You wasted your time.
On March 07 2011 00:26 Mailing wrote: Yeah. This is because say you have 10 hydra and 10 marines
A marine will have 5 hp, and a hydra does 5 damage.
But since hydra fire missiles without smart fire, like 3-4 hydra might try to fire on that marine at the same time, meaning 3/4 of their damage for that attack timing is wasted.
If a hydra is at 5 hp, the game will only allow a single marine to fire at that instance, and instantly tell the other 3 marines to shoot other targets.
It's a super big part of siege tank fire
Are you guys sure about Hydra not having smart fire? I really doubt it to be honest , I thought no units in Sc2 can overkill.
There is an easy way to test this if anyone is volunteered. Put 10 hydras one side , grouped. 2 marines to other side , one is very close to hydras and other is a littler far but also in range of all hydras. Start combat and let hydras only shoot once , if 2nd marine is undamaged , then yes damage system doesnt works as I thought and hydras overkill.
hugman - As I said , I thought AI doesnt attack a unit if delayed damage is higher than units current hp. Are you really sure that is wrong? Just to be clear , I'm not claiming anything , just asking
Try to test it with vikings, and it will be pretty clear that at least some units can overkill.
It would explain why can vikings kill vrs in small numbers, but in big numbers keeping same ratio they lose.
I dont know about hydras... I just wanted to point out that this defnitelly exists.
canikizu - It's not really a hydra vs marine thing , its projectile vs instant damage comparison. Think like , marine with projectile vs marine with instant damage. Or simply read OP more carefully
On March 07 2011 00:37 canikizu wrote: This is weird because I just did like 10+ tests of 24 hydra vs 24 marines and hydra always win by a large margin. And even when I testes 48 marines vs 24 hydra, hydra can still kills half of the marines before dying. I don't really understand how 24 hydra can lose to 24 marines.
Of course 24 hydra are going to beat 24 marine, he tweaked the stats so they have the same hp/dps
On March 07 2011 00:33 Sek-Kuar wrote: No no no, that cant be truth.
80 HP, 12 attack vs 45 HP, 6 attack when both have same attack speed - hydras must win always.
This results shows that efficienty of missile attack is about 25% of theoretical maximum. I dont believe that. Will have to test it myself.
PS: Hydras with 0/1/2 attack have same shoots2kill against marines
Read the OP again and slap yourself in the face
Hydras in the video have the same stats as marines, the only difference is that one side has instantly hitting attack and the other fires projectiles, that is all. Are people lazy to read or just thick ?
The thread title reads insta shot vs missile shot - you dont even have to read the op to know that its not marine vs hydra >.>
I would have never thought that it would matter THAT much. I hope for a redesign in HotS of many of the units. We can't expect them to do anything like that earlier.
On March 07 2011 00:37 canikizu wrote: This is weird because I just did like 10+ tests of 24 hydra vs 24 marines and hydra always win by a large margin. And even when I testes 48 marines vs 24 hydra, hydra can still kills half of the marines before dying. I don't really understand how 24 hydra can lose to 24 marines.
Did you read the orignial post where he said that he made marines and hydras identical and only difference is the marines or intant hit and the hydras are projectiles.
That is why he marines win. Since they instant shoot.
Edit: Wow I'm the 4th person to make notice of this in the time I quoted... lol
On March 07 2011 00:40 Tiax;mous wrote: canikizu - It's not really a hydra vs marine thing , its projectile vs instant damage comparison. Think like , marine with projectile vs marine with instant damage. Or simply read OP more carefully
If it's projectile vs instant damage, then it's obvious that instant damage is superior than projectile because of the wasted attacks. It's been like that since BW, or WC3. In BW, hydra has always spit, marines, tank always do instant damage.
On March 07 2011 00:33 Sek-Kuar wrote: No no no, that cant be truth.
80 HP, 12 attack vs 45 HP, 6 attack when both have same attack speed - hydras must win always.
This results shows that efficienty of missile attack is about 25% of theoretical maximum. I dont believe that. Will have to test it myself.
PS: Hydras with 0/1/2 attack have same shoots2kill against marines
Read the OP again and slap yourself in the face
Hydras in the video have the same stats as marines, the only difference is that one side has instantly hitting attack and the other fires projectiles, that is all. Are people lazy to read or just thick ?
On March 07 2011 00:43 Mailing wrote: Banes smart fire?
If you surround a marine with 3 banelings, and right click on the marine, do only 2 explode?
There is no such thing as smart fire. It is an emmerging effect of units having microsecond delays between firing. A group of 24 marines will never fire exactly at the same time. There will be micro seconds between each single shots. This allows the units to die and the marines to get new targets which have not yet died. Units with a shooting projectile like hydralisks will just fire at the same unit dispite the delay, (since it has not yet died). This gives a feeling of smart fire while it is just the result of very unnoticable delays between units.
This delay was added to increase preformance since it would get very CPU heavy if 50 marines try to shoot in the exact same frame.
This thread has already been derailed by so many people who can't or don't bother reading,
THESE ARE NOT HYDRALISKS. THEY ARE HYDRALISKS WITH THE EXACT SAME STATS AS MARINES. It is a comparison of missile based attacks versus instant attacks.
Back on topic, I think it's an interesting note, but it's nothing new. I don't think there's any sort of matchup imbalance because of this.
And I just tested the scenario I talked about in my previous post and it seems AI doesn't work like I thought it does. So yes , indeed overkill is yet another ( even bigger ) factor then projectile travel delay in this , I stand corrected.
Well that's an interesting video. Didn't know the difference was that big tbh. Though one can only assume Blizzard counts for the overkill when balancing the races, so what should be drawn in conclusion of this video is yet for me unknown.
On March 07 2011 00:26 Mailing wrote: Yeah. This is because say you have 10 hydra and 10 marines
A marine will have 5 hp, and a hydra does 5 damage.
But since hydra fire missiles without smart fire, like 3-4 hydra might try to fire on that marine at the same time, meaning 3/4 of their damage for that attack timing is wasted.
If a hydra is at 5 hp, the game will only allow a single marine to fire at that instance, and instantly tell the other 3 marines to shoot other targets.
It's a super big part of siege tank fire
Are you guys sure about Hydra not having smart fire? I really doubt it to be honest , I thought no units in Sc2 can overkill.
Of course they do, it's obvious when playing the game, e.g., in the midst of battle, if you tell a bunch of roaches to attack a siege tank that's within range and on 10 life, all the roaches shoot it.
On March 07 2011 00:26 Mailing wrote: Yeah. This is because say you have 10 hydra and 10 marines
A marine will have 5 hp, and a hydra does 5 damage.
But since hydra fire missiles without smart fire, like 3-4 hydra might try to fire on that marine at the same time, meaning 3/4 of their damage for that attack timing is wasted.
If a hydra is at 5 hp, the game will only allow a single marine to fire at that instance, and instantly tell the other 3 marines to shoot other targets.
It's a super big part of siege tank fire
Are you guys sure about Hydra not having smart fire? I really doubt it to be honest , I thought no units in Sc2 can overkill.
Of course they do, it's obvious when playing the game, e.g., in the midst of battle, if you tell a bunch of roaches to attack a siege tank that's within range and on 10 life, all the roaches shoot it.
Obviously I was talking about AI attack , not right clicking.
If you surround a marine with 3 banelings, and right click on the marine, do only 2 explode?
Aye, banelings are the only zerg uit that never overkills.
Just because you call it something doesnt mean it exists. It was in no way intentional. You guys make it sound like theres some sofisticated algorithm that makes it happen. But it's just a result of the game engine.
Lets compare it to this example. A flood kills a lot of people in some religious place. They call it an act of god. That sure doesn't mean god exists.
On March 07 2011 00:53 Fuzer wrote: If you want a fun fact... Hydras have bigger range and such a situation will never happen in real game. If you do the same test with bigger concade and some more range between units, I bet 100 euros that you will beat marines way easier.
Not reading to OP properly will cost you 100 Euros man. In those circumstances , no concave or range can save hydras...
This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have.
I don't understand how this video even fulfills this purpose. Shouldn't it compare insta shot hydras to missle shot hydras? Or perhaps missle shot marines to insta shot marines.
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
Good luck with trying to avoid the balance discussion though
So that PDD could have usage against more than just mutas.
This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have.
I don't understand how this video even fulfills this purpose. Shouldn't it compare insta shot hydras to missle shot hydras? Or perhaps missle shot marines to insta shot marines.
The stats were edited to be the same. So the only diference is the model and the shooting projectile.
This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have.
I don't understand how this video even fulfills this purpose. Shouldn't it compare insta shot hydras to missle shot hydras? Or perhaps missle shot marines to insta shot marines.
This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have.
I don't understand how this video even fulfills this purpose. Shouldn't it compare insta shot hydras to missle shot hydras? Or perhaps missle shot marines to insta shot marines.
The stats were edited to be the same. So the only diference is the model and the shooting projectile.
But the hydras are going through their whole shooting animation, or does it ignore that? Marines never have to drop their riffles after every shot (just after every few rounds) but it seems the hydras are pulling back every shot.
Read the OP. THEY ARE STATISTICALLY IDENTICAL.
That doesn't make them the same unit if animation delay adds a latent delay to every missle that the marine doesn't have. (which it kinda looks like it does, can't really tell at 480 p though)
The "animation" is just an animation. If you change the hydras fire speed to the same as the marine, they will fire the same speed, regardless of any animation.
This videos purpose is to demonstrate the power that units with insta shot have.
I don't understand how this video even fulfills this purpose. Shouldn't it compare insta shot hydras to missle shot hydras? Or perhaps missle shot marines to insta shot marines.
This is exactly what it does. Those hydras are basically marines with missiles. Read the OP.
There is no such thing as smart fire. It is an emmerging effect of units having microsecond delays between firing.
they shoot, they dont overkill. We call that smart fire, thus there is such a thing as smart fire.
If you surround a marine with 3 banelings, and right click on the marine, do only 2 explode?
Aye, banelings are the only zerg uit that never overkills.
Just because you call it something doesnt mean it exists. It was in no way intentional. You guys make it sound like theres some sofisticated algorithm that makes it happen. But it's just a result of the game engine.
Lets compare it to this example. A flood kills a lot of people in some religious place. They call it an act of god. That sure doesn't mean god exists.
You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two sieged tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays on fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanic that we call smartfire .
well it looks like the hydras are shooting slower, would have to remove the fire animations. (though not sure on that). Don't think hydras wait till their projektile hits so that can't be it.
Anyway they overkill terrible in this video. Just like marauders do when you go into close combat with them. So under normal conditions you want to engange on max range. I think since the ai attacks wounded units its really beneficial for units that don't overkill so easy.
And it always been spikes in bw as well, even though they were instant in bw. Anyway they missile shots are generally stronger so i think its evened out just fine, just decides on what you want. But as there is an engagement in normal situations before everyone is in range i think its more evened out and only looks like this if you put them close together, where instant is clearly superior.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
He is right Slunk , try that with viking instead of tanks and you'll see.
ive noticed this tvt, i actually end up getting owned when i try to manually target marines with other marines (say I have 3 marines he has 2 marines ive actually lost trying to manually target rofl, its like by doing that I actually miss a round of shots or something)
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
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:
Infested Terran
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.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
The thing you don't understand is that computers actually can't do 2 things at the exactly the same time. You just think they do because they do 2 things very fast so it looks like they're doing both of them at the same time. This happens with everything in your computer, including the firing of siege tanks. There will be some arbitrary order in which the units fire, and the units that fire later will not target a dead unit.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
The thing you don't understand is that computers actually can't do 2 things at the exactly the same time. You just think they do because they do 2 things very fast so it looks like they're doing both of them at the same time. This happens with everything in your computer, including the firing of siege tanks. There will be some arbitrary order in which the units fire, and the units that fire later will not target a dead unit.
That "Arbitrary order" is the definition of what smart fire is for siege tanks.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
Because the sc2 engine works like this: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! ...
in sc:bw it was like: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? save answer ...
- every unit having an enemy unit in range: shoot!
And whats the point of asking me which tank is going to shot first? I dont know, i didnt write the engine. Maybe every unit gets an integer once they are build, and the engine goes thrue those numbers every tick, maybe its the closest one, or whatever.
I mean, its the same with every instant shoot unit. Drop a 1 hp marauder in range of 2 immortals. Only one will shoot. Smart fire? No! Its just how the engine works. By the time the engine works with the 2nd immortal, they is no marauder anymore.
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
The engine is linear and processes everything in order. After a unit dies, it's no longer a valid target and the remaining attacks to be processed take that into account.
There is no actual delay between units firing, the ones that attack, do so in the same game frame(the game mechanics run at 16 frames per "game" second).
The main difference is the overkill, because units acquire the closest target(a few units like the BC for example acquire based on angle) and usually the closest target is the same unit for a big part of your army. This is easiest to notice with vikings.
The example in the video is also obviously flawed and tilted in favor of marines. Nobody just walks right next to the enemy and then attacks for the first time. If the units are attack moved the difference is smaller, but still significant.
If Blizzard wants to equalize this then they could implement an actual smart fire for all units. Alternatively they could make all units overkill, but this will just highlight how ineffective it is for all units to just acquire the closest target.
On March 07 2011 01:29 Avril_Lavigne wrote: There isn't any point to this video because hydras weren't intentionally supposed to be cost efficient against marines. duh. try 20 banelings vs 20 marines then how about that? psh
The point of the video is that Marines are way more cost effective than Hydras and the reason for that is not just the obvious (better stats for less cash) but also because of instant attacks versus projectiles.
I do think that the Hydras vs Marine comparison shows a flaw in the balance of the game. There are similar unbalances between units - Roachs vs Stalkers for example - but in that and other cases there are still reasons why the Stalkers are viable even if Protoss could produce Roaches. Blink, the ability to attack air and much longer attack range. Hydras are simply inferior to Marines in every way you can imagine and by a HUGE margin. They have no situational power where they outperform Marines.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
The thing you don't understand is that computers actually can't do 2 things at the exactly the same time. You just think they do because they do 2 things very fast so it looks like they're doing both of them at the same time. This happens with everything in your computer, including the firing of siege tanks. There will be some arbitrary order in which the units fire, and the units that fire later will not target a dead unit.
That "Arbitrary order" is the definition of what smart fire is for siege tanks.
No the arbitrary order is not anything special, if I had to guess it's probably just a loop that goes through the units and assigning targets to them. There's nothing 'smart' about it.
You know I just thought of something... to better represent Instafire vs Missile attack, use statistically equal STALKERS, I'm pretty sure they'd lose even WITH +3 weapons, hahahaha
As far as I'm concerned, having a missile attack balances out certain units (like the Hydra and the Marauder) and is taken into concern as a balancing issue. It's not like some units were arbitrarily given missile attacks and others instant.
The overkill issue, as far as I'm concerned, can eventually be managed with micro. In SC1 we had people microing individual tanks to make sure they weren't overkilling, and the same is possible for small groups of hydras. We already have marine splitting, what's to say that selecting a slice of hydras and alternating their attacks between high-value targets is out of reach once people get more used to the game and mechanically advanced?
On March 07 2011 01:29 Avril_Lavigne wrote: This is an interesting find imagine marines without insta shot tho o.0
A balanced Starcraft?
I would like to see a mod that gives marines a projectile and have some pros play regular games on it, to see how big of a difference it makes, though.
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
Good luck with trying to avoid the balance discussion though
Actually their attack in BW was still the needle spines (same as SC2). It's just that Blizzard decided to add a projectile for them in SC2.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
Because the sc2 engine works like this: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! ...
in sc:bw it was like: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? save answer ...
- every unit having an enemy unit in range: shoot!
And whats the point of asking me which tank is going to shot first? I dont know, i didnt write the engine. Maybe every unit gets an integer once they are build, and the engine goes thrue those numbers every tick, maybe its the closest one, or whatever.
I mean, its the same with every instant shoot unit. Drop a 1 hp marauder in range of 2 immortals. Only one will shoot. Smart fire? No! Its just how the engine works. By the time the engine works with the 2nd immortal, they is no marauder anymore.
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
Well there you have it. In the end it doesn't matter what the reasoning for the occurence of smartfire is. It is a fact that units with missile do overkill targets while instant shooting units do not. In BW both did overkill. Not overkilling units is smartfire and makes for better effective DPS.
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 Hydralisks They 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.
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 Hydralisks They 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.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
Because the sc2 engine works like this: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! ...
in sc:bw it was like: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? save answer ...
- every unit having an enemy unit in range: shoot!
And whats the point of asking me which tank is going to shot first? I dont know, i didnt write the engine. Maybe every unit gets an integer once they are build, and the engine goes thrue those numbers every tick, maybe its the closest one, or whatever.
I mean, its the same with every instant shoot unit. Drop a 1 hp marauder in range of 2 immortals. Only one will shoot. Smart fire? No! Its just how the engine works. By the time the engine works with the 2nd immortal, they is no marauder anymore.
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
About the Browder quote, he actually got it wrong and gave the numbers for the random attack delay, but that can't explain why there's no overkill at all, since if it was random, then it would randomly overkill or not, the chance depending on how many units can fire and the granulity of the randomness. He even said "waste fewer shots" as if they still overkill, but they actually don't overkill at all.
The delay between each unit is in the internal calculations only, the units still fire at the same game frame.
There are also other delays that are part of the game mechanics, like the damage point and turning rate, which you can actually notice, but they can't result in a lack of overkill.
In BW the units died on the next frame. If you set the game speed to slowest, you can easily see that units sit with 0 hp for a short time before dying. This does not happen in SC2.
Its certainly odd but its probably that the 1st few marines don't die for the short duration that they are in immune to being overkilled flagged and so closer hydrines don't kill them from close earlier while they are in that state even though they could.
Thus those immune to being overkilled are immune to dmg for the duration of the missile arriving the kill them, giving them time to output the odd shot extra giving them an advantage of insta shot vs missile shot.
It would be interesting to see if actual hydras(not these hydrines) would have a significant benefit if given insta shots instead.
Wow, extremely interesting simulation, I never realized how much of an effect the projectile mechanic had on the game. I wonder if marines would even be used if every unit behaved in the same way o.O
Edit:
On March 07 2011 02:30 JerKy wrote: I understand what you're trying to say here, but I think this was a bit of a bad example.
Marines counter hydralisks, so I think this match was tilted towards marines to begin with.
He's exploring projectile vs instant attack; the units are exactly the same otherwise (he tweaked the health/rate of fire).
In addition, there's not a definite reason why marines should counter hydralisks, this somewhat simulation explains that nuance.
Edit2: I suppose removal of the instant attack between BW and SC2 was an enormous stealth-nerf, I wonder if they just did this to put hydras in line with the PDD mechanic...
On March 07 2011 01:34 Grummler wrote: Oh, here is the original dustin bowder post: + Show Spoiler +
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
Hmmm, I smell something decidedly fishy in that quote, insofar as I think Mr. Browder has misunderstood what his techies are telling him.
In order for that to be true, the following scenario would be possible...
Assuming a 1/16th of a second delay between each instant firer's shot, if a force of 54 marines were moved into range of a target and the target right clicked, it would take a minimum of three seconds for each of those marines to get a shot off. Furthermore, given that marines attack roughly every 0.9 game seconds, the rate of fire of those marines would be reduced by a factor of almost three. In fact, in order for marines to be able to shoot every 0.9 game seconds, under Mr. Browders scenario a force could consist of no more than about 15 marines, with every additional marine after that point not contributing to the overall DPS (by virtue of having to wait for all the others to take a shot before it's allowed to shoot).
Clearly, this does not happen.
I suspect what he means it takes between 1/8th and 1/16th of a second to poll the AI of all units on the field, so whilst all shots are not simultaneous, all units that are eligible to fire within a given pool of the AI will do so over the course of between 1/8th and 1/16th of a second.
I wouldn't mind if they added overkill for all hitscan attacks. It might mess with the balance but it'd make the game more interesting, and make stuff like Zealot bombs more viable again (if anyone built tanks in TvP)
I'm not sure why this argument exists ================================
(1) Isn't it obvious that if everything is the same except instant shot and projectile that the projectile would perform worse? How is this even remotely surprising or revealing?
(2) Why are people comparing marines to hydras? That is not what the video is about, at all. (3) There are plenty of other stats and balancing attributes that were taken into consideration when deciding which units to have instant hit or projectile. (4) Doesn't the smart fire system have a short delay before every single attack command regardless of whether or not it is instant shot or projectile? Unless you are target firing, an a+moved force should not overkill regardless of instant shot or projectile. I could be wrong about this, but that is my understanding. (4.a) If a Stalker laser is traveling through the air, and it is going to kill its target, that target is no longer eligible to receive an automatic attack command but can receive a manual attack command. I'm pretty sure about this, but could be wrong.
I don't know. This argument seems pointless and will do nothing but create a thread of devolving QQing about mechanics that are not fully understood.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
Because the sc2 engine works like this: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! ...
in sc:bw it was like: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? save answer ...
- every unit having an enemy unit in range: shoot!
And whats the point of asking me which tank is going to shot first? I dont know, i didnt write the engine. Maybe every unit gets an integer once they are build, and the engine goes thrue those numbers every tick, maybe its the closest one, or whatever.
I mean, its the same with every instant shoot unit. Drop a 1 hp marauder in range of 2 immortals. Only one will shoot. Smart fire? No! Its just how the engine works. By the time the engine works with the 2nd immortal, they is no marauder anymore.
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
Well there you have it. In the end it doesn't matter what the reasoning for the occurence of smartfire is. It is a fact that units with missile do overkill targets while instant shooting units do not. In BW both did overkill. Not overkilling units is smartfire and makes for better effective DPS.
In case you already forgot, thats what you said hours ago:
[...] there is a smartfire algorhythm
And no, there is no algorithm at all. Its wrong what you said. I never said that tanks do overkill, though. Many people also think thats its only the tanks that have a "smart fire" thingy - thats wrong too.
Just because instant shoot untis doesnt overkill, there doesnt have to be some kind of mystic smart fire.
On March 06 2011 23:56 Zalias wrote: Not bad video, ofcourse it allmost never happens that hidra will fight like that vs marines ( no1 will even make those in zvt). But i always thought that marine is a bit too much cost-effective...
The video shows two equal units with 100% equal stats, but one of them has a missle, the other one an instant atack. It coincedently just happens to be a marine and a hydra graphic modell. Immortal (without shields and stuff) vs marauder would be the same. Maybe even worse, cause the marauders missle are much slower than the hydras.
It's unreal how many people here cannot grasp this simple fact.
Woo! That was awesome and very interesting. I never knew there was such a big differences. Maybe you should of done armor upgrade instead of attack? Just a thought
On March 06 2011 23:50 FortuneSyn wrote: all hydra stats (collision size, hp, attack dmg and shot delays) were tweaked to match the marine. The only difference between the 2 in this video is that the hydra shoots a missile, the marine shoots instantly.
I really don't believe it... Will be running my own tests on this as it simply makes no sense...
The hydra's look like they are attacking MUCH slower... Was the attack animation sped up aswell? because it doesn't look like it, in which case the "shot delay" whatever value they changed is flat-out wrong.
Everyone who's played any DotA/HoN game knows how important the attack animation speed is when it comes to attacks... It is the deciding factor in this video, NOT the fact that it is a missile attack.
Should change the title of the thread to "long attack animation vs short attack animation" as that's the major difference in this vid. NOT the missile attack.
(ps, anyone who's saying it's overkill that's the problem, is flat-out wrong. If that were the case the first marine would die in the first hit...)
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
Good luck with trying to avoid the balance discussion though
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
Because the sc2 engine works like this: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? If yes: shoot! ...
in sc:bw it was like: - take unit 1: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 2: Are there enemy units in range? save answer - take unit 3: Are there enemy units in range? save answer ...
- every unit having an enemy unit in range: shoot!
And whats the point of asking me which tank is going to shot first? I dont know, i didnt write the engine. Maybe every unit gets an integer once they are build, and the engine goes thrue those numbers every tick, maybe its the closest one, or whatever.
I mean, its the same with every instant shoot unit. Drop a 1 hp marauder in range of 2 immortals. Only one will shoot. Smart fire? No! Its just how the engine works. By the time the engine works with the 2nd immortal, they is no marauder anymore.
DustinB: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots.
Well there you have it. In the end it doesn't matter what the reasoning for the occurence of smartfire is. It is a fact that units with missile do overkill targets while instant shooting units do not. In BW both did overkill. Not overkilling units is smartfire and makes for better effective DPS.
In case you already forgot, thats what you said hours ago:
And no, there is no algorithm at all. Its wrong what you said. I never said that tanks do overkill, though. Many people also think thats its only the tanks that have a "smart fire" thingy - thats wrong too.
Just because instant shoot untis doesnt overkill, there doesnt have to be some kind of mystic smart fire.
When units don't overkill we attribute them as having smartfire. The two concepts are synonymous. The word "smartfire" does not imply intent. Blizzard wrote code that produces this effect, that's what he's talking about when he mentions the algorithm. Whether or not they intended it to be that way is inconsequential.
Im pretty sure it doesnt have to do much with missile vs. not missile, since the marines has "missile" attacks, they can overkill, too
The reason why Hydra loose so bad is because they overkill very much. due to their slower attack speed.
For example take a target with 23 HP (completly made up scenario) Marine dmg: 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 24 HP dmg done, with an overkill of 1. Hydra dmg: 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = 28 HP dmg done, with an overkill of 5.
So the Hydra lost 5 dmg, due to its higher dmg resulting in an overkill.
Now think about that scenario with 3 Marines/Hydras shooting simultaniously on a target with 3 HP. Hydra would overkill for 18(!) HP, while marines would only do overkill for 9. Thats a huge difference.
So in conclusion u have to say the quicker attackspeed and the quicker traveltime of the marines give them the advantage, because they switch targets more efficient. I want to emphazise again Marines dont have instant attack like tanks. If u run away from 10x3HP lings u will not just shoot 10 times, because the AI will focus down the nearest target first and overkill it very hard, even with marines.
EDIT: Nevermind? I just read on the one side there are marines and on the other "marines" in Hydra models with just slower missles. Well my calculation is still valid and for a view on the actual marine vs. Hydra it is an explanation, why Hydra get killed so hard by Marines.
On March 07 2011 03:27 ch4ppi wrote: Im pretty sure it doesnt have to do much with missile vs. not missile, since the marines has "missile" attacks, they can overkill, too
The reason why Hydra loose so bad is because they overkill very much. due to their slower attack speed.
For example take a target with 23 HP (completly made up scenario) Marine dmg: 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 24 HP dmg done, with an overkill of 1. Hydra dmg: 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = 28 HP dmg done, with an overkill of 5.
So the Hydra lost 5 dmg, due to its higher dmg resulting in an overkill.
Now think about that scenario with 3 Marines/Hydras shooting simultaniously on a target with 3 HP. Hydra would overkill for 18(!) HP, while marines would only do overkill for 9. Thats a huge difference.
So in conclusion u have to say the quicker attackspeed and the quicker traveltime of the marines give them the advantage, because they switch targets more efficient. I want to emphazise again Marines dont have instant attack like tanks. If u run away from 10x3HP lings u will not just shoot 10 times, because the AI will focus down the nearest target first and overkill it very hard, even with marines.
The only conlcusion people can draw from your post: You didnt read the OP or you did read it but didnt understand what you have read. Which one is it?
Jesus people need to learn to read English in this thread. READ THE DAMN OP BEFORE POSTING YOUR RETARDED OFFTOPIC COMMENTS
On Topic: I believe Blizzard knows the difference between missile vs non-missile (instant) attack animations. If it is actually a bug, it should be posted on Blizz forums.
Guys, this is an interesting video, but you can't look at this and say hydras are underpowered/marines are overpowered. The hydra and marine are different units. They are also balanced differently. A hydra may have missile attacks, but they have higher damage to compensate.
On March 07 2011 02:00 Sensator wrote: I'm fine with the Hydra shot delay, I just want Hydras to be buffed (slightly). I dunno how, movement speed or something like that.
On March 07 2011 03:05 TimeSpiral wrote: I'm not sure why this argument exists ================================
(1) Isn't it obvious that if everything is the same except instant shot and projectile that the projectile would perform worse? How is this even remotely surprising or revealing?
(2) Why are people comparing marines to hydras? That is not what the video is about, at all. (3) There are plenty of other stats and balancing attributes that were taken into consideration when deciding which units to have instant hit or projectile. (4) Doesn't the smart fire system have a short delay before every single attack command regardless of whether or not it is instant shot or projectile? Unless you are target firing, an a+moved force should not overkill regardless of instant shot or projectile. I could be wrong about this, but that is my understanding. (4.a) If a Stalker laser is traveling through the air, and it is going to kill its target, that target is no longer eligible to receive an automatic attack command but can receive a manual attack command. I'm pretty sure about this, but could be wrong.
I don't know. This argument seems pointless and will do nothing but create a thread of devolving QQing about mechanics that are not fully understood.
Instant and Missile shots are fair. Blizzard doesn't just assign numbers and say "X has Y dps and Z has Y dps, it's balanced." If a unit is clearly too weak/strong Blizzard will change it. The game will be balanced even if different units have different efficiency.
The only difference is that it makes focus fire micro with instant units more effective, because they don't overkill.
lol ive tried this by myself in the editor when you equalize the stats for any ranged projectile unit to that of the marine's, the marines mysteriously end up winning... its because instant shots dont overkill whereas projectiles do this makes units like the marine and reaper very, very powerful (more so than they are intended to be)
I would agree with the post a couple above me, Blizzard obviously (hopefully???) knew the difference an insta and a missile shot.
Maybe they just wanted to keep to real physics, but I think that there is some ulterior motive behind this.
I can't really think of any insta-shot units other than marines, so maybe they just felt that Terran needed some sort of insta-shot to compete with the melee attacks (I can see the comparison) of the base units, but don't read that as a balance comment. What would be interesting to see is how making marines missile shot would change them in the same sort of situation, and then maybe some results and conclusions can be drawn.
The only reason the Marines come out so far ahead is because instant shots prevent overkill. With better Micro and the units not in ridiculous melee range which almost never would happen marine vs marine anyways the results are a lot closer than what the video would like you to believe.
On March 07 2011 01:06 Slunk wrote: You are wrong, there is a smartfire algorhythm. If you have two tanks and you drop a zergling in the range of both, in SC1 both would fire, in SC2 only one fires. This has nothing to do with delays ion fire rate or something, this is just an intended mechanis m that we call smartfire .
YOU are wrong. There is NO smartfire. The tanks doesnt shot simultaniously, because the game engine calculates everything step by step. Once the first shot, there is no zergling anymore, so no need to the 2nd tank to shoot.
Dustin Bowder even said this in an interview, that this wasnt intentional and purely is a coincident. Back then he said, that they might give tanks a (very fast) missle atack without changing the shot animation at all.
You have TWO tanks at EQUAL range from an overlord.
BOTH are in siege mode.
You now DROP a zergling. WHICH tank fires FIRST, and WHY. They SHOULD fire at the same time, but do not. Why.
The thing you don't understand is that computers actually can't do 2 things at the exactly the same time. You just think they do because they do 2 things very fast so it looks like they're doing both of them at the same time. This happens with everything in your computer, including the firing of siege tanks. There will be some arbitrary order in which the units fire, and the units that fire later will not target a dead unit.
That "Arbitrary order" is the definition of what smart fire is for siege tanks.
There is no smart fire. Dustin Browder explained this previously. Tank shots are simply instantaneous.
On March 07 2011 03:05 TimeSpiral wrote: I'm not sure why this argument exists ================================
(4.a) If a Stalker laser is traveling through the air, and it is going to kill its target, that target is no longer eligible to receive an automatic attack command but can receive a manual attack command. I'm pretty sure about this, but could be wrong.
I don't know. This argument seems pointless and will do nothing but create a thread of devolving QQing about mechanics that are not fully understood.
^ Did anyone see this?
That part (4.a) is wrong. Just find a unit tester map , place 10 vikings and 2 ravens ( one raven is closer to vikings than other ) and start combat. All vikings will attack the closer raven and 2nd raven will be undamaged after first volley. There is no smart fire or whatsoever.
At the beginning , I was thinking the same thing , as people always said there is smart fire in Sc2 but turns out what they called smart fire is just engine executing unit actions one by one. ( unlike BW where actions were executed altogether with certain intervals which allowed overkill even with instant attacks )
Obviously it's for balancing, but it still leaves bad taste for "disadvantaged" race. And personally it kind of takes "realism" out of the game. For instance, if you move a zergling where 3 tanks are seiged. Only two seige tanks will shot valleys to it. (instant + smart targeting) If you move a zergling where 10 stalkers are clumped together, all 10 stalkers will shoot at it. (missile + "smart" targeting)
If you multiply this scenario with many other units, how "instant shots" are much more efficient at killing than flying projectiles because you basically have no wasted shots with instant. Besides which, tanks shoot heavy missiles in real life and it just feel weird that their shots are instant.
(4.a) If a Stalker laser is traveling through the air, and it is going to kill its target, that target is no longer eligible to receive an automatic attack command but can receive a manual attack command. I'm pretty sure about this, but could be wrong.
[/b]
This is incorrect, and is the main reason someone made this video. If a 2nd stalker gets in range it will fire a shot, however the chances of one getting in range before the much, much faster laser doesn't happen very often. It's the reason that instant shooting is stronger in the first place (Especially for Siege Tanks, the reason it effects siege tanks more than any other unit is because Seige Tanks are for the most part the only unit that all of them will be attacking at the same time 100% of the time during a typical encounter due to their massive range)
The reason this video is insanely misleading is because ranged units are very rarely in melee range of each other. When the units are in a spread and micro occurs which is what happens in real games the results will be much, much closer. Hell, if you start them apart and just A move both balls it will be much closer.
Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Please actually read the OP. Thanks.
I can't find a reason to be concerned about this. If the game were balanced around a math problem which happened to not take projectile versus instant shot units into account, it would be worth mentioning, but as it stands I just don't see how this information is useful, since if projectile attack units were too weak or scaled badly or something on the whole they could just have their numbers adjusted to compensate.
The reason is because Marines won't overkill in the sense that all of them will fire at 1 unit. Marines will only shoot enough to kill that certain unit and the rest will choose another target and so on and so forth. This is for all intents and purposes, the Siege Tank "Smart Fire" in play.
When units don't overkill we attribute them as having smartfire. The two concepts are synonymous. The word "smartfire" does not imply intent. Blizzard wrote code that produces this effect, that's what he's talking about when he mentions the algorithm. Whether or not they intended it to be that way is inconsequential.
The point is that there is no smartfire AI or "algorhythm". There is no decision-making that looks at who's being attacked by what and sees that something is about to die, so it shoots something else. The effect of "smartfire" is nothing more than an outgrowth of instant attack speed coupled with unit death happening during the processing of attacks.
I'd like to point out the offset impact of the missile attack. At 34 seconds, if properly paused you will find that 4 "hydras" are damaged and that none of the marines are damaged. This plays are large role, especially since the opposing "hydras" are softened up more quickly.
When adding this factor with "smartfire," (it's just the way the engine is built, who cares what concept is called by, as long as you don't have to state "it's the linear progression of automated instant shooting to see whether the target is dead or not fire" /rant) you can achieve some pretty horrific results. To back this up; when pausing at a certain frame at 35 seconds, there are 2 dead "hydras" and 3 damaged "hydras", while there is only 1 dead marine, and 2 damaged marines. This compounds further leading to an overall amazing result favouring the instant firing mechanism.
I would like to see the impact that armour for the "hydras" would have in this situation.
I hope blizzard does consider 'projectile' vs 'instant shot' when they balance. Like has been mentioned, Dragoons are a good example of how much 'projectile' speed attacks can affect game play. They overkilled way more than instant shot units, they were much worse at clearer mines, etc. I think in the case of the Dragoon it made the interesting because you had to compensate for the Dragoons weakness (led to dancing micro, to clear mines).
Also, I think it is hilarious how many people thing this has to do with Hydra vs Marine balance...
To an extent I like the smart firing aspect of the game; Queing up focus fire on marauders for immortals can make some unwinnable fights winnable. However, in the immortal case, they are only super cost affective when picking out 'armored' units from the fray, so there is some micro skill involved. This particular application of the mechanic does seem pretty unreasonable though :-/.
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
The thing I feel this video shows is how much of an advantage a first volley is, and how much better instant fire is compared to projectile due to something about the AI. Since the hydras shouldn't have 2 spines firing out from themselves at the same time, you would expect the numbers to be equal, as they get the same damage per interval as the marines, except the marines get theirs earlier. The only thing that could offset the equality would be AI or the advantage of first volley, since the marines get their damage to occur about 1 attack sequence sooner basically, due to instant fire.
What would be interesting is if someone made a scenario where marines had the same stats as a hydra, then compare them fighting head to head (marine-hydra vs hydra). I would expect the results to occur in similar numbers, but any high amount of variance could show further existence of overkill or smart fire respectively.
Also, in regards to the above poster about the marine bio ball, it would appear that marines could help make marauders incredibly more effective than they are already in a head to head fight against another army mass (Hydra/Roach for example). If the marines targeted the lower health units and killed them with their instant fire, the marauders wouldn't waste their shots on them. Thus, removing the overkill factor from the marauders. However, I am not 100% sure on how the AI works, so I do not exactly know if the marines would change targets to get a finishing blow, as that would be most effective and the AI tends to try and be effective.
EDIT: Another thing I would like to see is the hydras getting a surround on the marines, and see if that would distribute damage more effectively for the hydras, or ineffectively for the marines (I would assume both). Of course the numbers would have to be so that each hydra can target each marine without moving.
On March 07 2011 03:05 TimeSpiral wrote: I'm not sure why this argument exists ================================
(4.a) If a Stalker laser is traveling through the air, and it is going to kill its target, that target is no longer eligible to receive an automatic attack command but can receive a manual attack command. I'm pretty sure about this, but could be wrong.
I don't know. This argument seems pointless and will do nothing but create a thread of devolving QQing about mechanics that are not fully understood.
^ Did anyone see this?
That part (4.a) is wrong. Just find a unit tester map , place 10 vikings and 2 ravens ( one raven is closer to vikings than other ) and start combat. All vikings will attack the closer raven and 2nd raven will be undamaged after first volley. There is no smart fire or whatsoever.
At the beginning , I was thinking the same thing , as people always said there is smart fire in Sc2 but turns out what they called smart fire is just engine executing unit actions one by one. ( unlike BW where actions were executed altogether with certain intervals which allowed overkill even with instant attacks )
If I was at home, I'd test it, but i'm fairly sure the overkill only applies to the first target - when initiating combat, units will all shoot at the foe they see first (which is almost always the closest unit)
Just from my ZvZ experience: In roach vs roach battles, with a similar amount of units on both sides, the player with a few Zerglings will win. They run in first and the first ling gets shot by ALL roaches in range, and if you move-command your roaches close to his, they will be able to hit multiple targets since they are "close" to a number of roaches. After that the fire will even out, but you should be about 3 roaches ahead.
This effect is repeated if the enemy Zerg tries to kite - after every move-command, they will treat each battle as a new initiation. So the retreating player is actually in a disadvantage. (especially if you still have Zerglings in the front)
It is the same with any ranged unit, but for some reason not really for siege tanks. Maybe the are just slower in locking their target (delayed instant attack, stupid as it may sound), but this is just speculation.
So in the end, units with faster attack speed will spread their fire faster, and instantanious ranged attacks will obviously do so too - which is how I'd explain this example video.
Someone brought this to my attention in a roach/hydra topic in the strategy forums and I was taken by surprise. The overkill that the missile units do made me wonder how many games were ruined. >.<
This is how I think it should be fixed. Keep the way missile attacks look the same, but make the actual damage done instant. Easy peasy.
If they want to keep the feel of missile. Maybe they could make it so units that are about to be killed by a missile unit in one volley can't attack nor be attacked. If someone at Blizzard could program a smart targeting system for siege tanks, then I don't see why they wouldn't be able to do this.
On March 07 2011 04:17 EpicLord wrote: The thing I feel this video shows is how much of an advantage a first volley is, and how much better instant fire is compared to projectile due to something about the AI. Since the hydras shouldn't have 2 spines firing out from themselves at the same time, you would expect the numbers to be equal, as they get the same damage per interval as the marines, except the marines get theirs earlier. The only thing that could offset the equality would be AI or the advantage of first volley, since the marines get their damage to occur about 1 attack sequence sooner basically, due to instant fire.
What would be interesting is if someone made a scenario where marines had the same stats as a hydra, then compare them fighting head to head (marine-hydra vs hydra). I would expect the results to occur in similar numbers, but any high amount of variance could show further existence of overkill or smart fire respectively.
Why would that be different to marine vs marine with insta vs time delay? Same thing just slightly different stats which shouldn't change the overall outcome.
When units don't overkill we attribute them as having smartfire. The two concepts are synonymous. The word "smartfire" does not imply intent. Blizzard wrote code that produces this effect, that's what he's talking about when he mentions the algorithm. Whether or not they intended it to be that way is inconsequential.
The point is that there is no smartfire AI or "algorhythm". There is no decision-making that looks at who's being attacked by what and sees that something is about to die, so it shoots something else. The effect of "smartfire" is nothing more than an outgrowth of instant attack speed coupled with unit death happening during the processing of attacks.
You're bringing up intent, which I already addressed
This topic has been discussed (ongoing) @PlayXP and it's one of the (many) reasons people grind their teeth against Blizzard and its Terran favoritism. I sympathize with them.
I can't find a reason to be concerned about this. If the game were balanced around a math problem which happened to not take projectile versus instant shot units into account, it would be worth mentioning, but as it stands I just don't see how this information is useful, since if projectile attack units were too weak or scaled badly or something on the whole they could just have their numbers adjusted to compensate.
You seem to be challenged when it comes to understanding what you read. The OP didn't give any real information, just disclaimers. My post was replying to the people crying imbalance.
God you people should of stayed in school, or at least consider taking a placement level English course. Might be a bad idea since most of you would fail it miserably.
On March 07 2011 04:17 EpicLord wrote: The thing I feel this video shows is how much of an advantage a first volley is, and how much better instant fire is compared to projectile due to something about the AI. Since the hydras shouldn't have 2 spines firing out from themselves at the same time, you would expect the numbers to be equal, as they get the same damage per interval as the marines, except the marines get theirs earlier. The only thing that could offset the equality would be AI or the advantage of first volley, since the marines get their damage to occur about 1 attack sequence sooner basically, due to instant fire.
What would be interesting is if someone made a scenario where marines had the same stats as a hydra, then compare them fighting head to head (marine-hydra vs hydra). I would expect the results to occur in similar numbers, but any high amount of variance could show further existence of overkill or smart fire respectively.
This is not about the "hydras" dying first because of the first volley hitting earlier, it's about multiple "hydras" shooting the same target and doing way more damage than is necessary to kill.
to be honest, I don't think blizzard even knows the extent that instant ranged damage has over projectiles. I think this mechanic is a tricky thing to deal with when trying to balance the game since there is the exponential growth damage output with the existence of deathballs from terran and protoss. In contrast, zerg has a decrease of damage output since they rely on surrounds and terrain and surface area for melee damage etc.
Would a mod kindly edit the OP with red font where it talks about hydras being identical to marines except for the projectile attack?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
CAN YOU F*CKIN RETARDS READ THE DAMN OP POST!??!!?
jesus christ stupid americans cant read the 20 words in the post
for those of you who are too stupid to understand what the OP is saying: THOSE ARE NOT NORMAL HYDRALISKS IN THE VIDEO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME STATS (health, range, rate of fire, unit collision size, movement speed, EVERYTHING) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE HYDRALISKS FIRE PROJECTILES AND THE MARINES FIRE INSTANTLY.
as a result, the marines CANNOT overkill the hydralisks do overkill
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Read the damn OP. You are clearly not seeing the point of this thread. It not comparing Hydras to marine.
Personally I think this goes a long way to explain why marines are so powerful in SC2. According to this video 0/0 marines are essentially 3/0 BW marines.
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
So someone else suggested this but now I am very curious as well. Shouldn't armor upgrades be more valuable for a unit that fires a projectile then? Since more dps means more overkill, but more armor means more uptime? I think I'm going to do some test on this.
edit: or maybe its just the fact that I feel like we're not going to get the full benefit of the atk dmg due to overkilling, but you always get the full benefit of the armor upgrade.
On March 07 2011 04:17 EpicLord wrote: The thing I feel this video shows is how much of an advantage a first volley is, and how much better instant fire is compared to projectile due to something about the AI. Since the hydras shouldn't have 2 spines firing out from themselves at the same time, you would expect the numbers to be equal, as they get the same damage per interval as the marines, except the marines get theirs earlier. The only thing that could offset the equality would be AI or the advantage of first volley, since the marines get their damage to occur about 1 attack sequence sooner basically, due to instant fire.
What would be interesting is if someone made a scenario where marines had the same stats as a hydra, then compare them fighting head to head (marine-hydra vs hydra). I would expect the results to occur in similar numbers, but any high amount of variance could show further existence of overkill or smart fire respectively.
Why would that be different to marine vs marine with insta vs time delay? Same thing just slightly different stats which shouldn't change the overall outcome.
That is my point. If the stats made it so that the numbers would work out in a different way (Like X amount of shots to kill Unit A, compared to the original test where X would be different, which would increase the effect of overkill/smart fire), it could further show evidence of well, whatever the people in this thread are looking for evidence of .
On March 07 2011 04:26 lilky wrote: CAN YOU F*CKIN RETARDS READ THE DAMN OP POST!??!!?
jesus christ stupid americans cant read the 20 words in the post
for those of you who are too stupid to understand what the OP is saying: THOSE ARE NOT NORMAL HYDRALISKS IN THE VIDEO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME STATS (health, range, rate of fire, unit collision size, movement speed, EVERYTHING) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE HYDRALISKS FIRE PROJECTILES AND THE MARINES FIRE INSTANTLY.
as a result, the marines CANNOT overkill the hydralisks do overkill
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
No, I disagree. If that was the case, they would not attack at all, like the vice example: SIEGE TANKS! .
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
No, I disagree. If that was the case, they would not attack at all, like the vice example: SIEGE TANKS! .
Marines and other high rate-of-fire instant-attack units don't have splash damage so it doesn't even matter if they overkill something when they have no other options.
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
to clarify some things:
Yes i know these are no " real" hydras butmy point still stands. The question the OP ask is complete sensless: u can not ask if its a good thing that there is a diffrence between missle and instant shot cause the damn diffrence is there ! U can only ask if u want the diffrence in the game or if u dont want it there then either make all shots isntant or missle like but then u loose one option to balance the dmg output of units wihtout affecting the real numbers. ( just to show u what i mean a very rough, easy and therefore very limited example : u can balance marines/stlaker/lings so that stalkers kill marines but lose to lings and lings still lose to marines. If u only have untis with identical attacktypes u cant creat such a scenario, therefore u have meele and range untis and slow attack rate vs fast attack rate or instat vs missle shot .And i think noone would ever say that overall having less options is agodd thing or not ? U can only ask : Do i want this specific diffrence in this specific situation so that overall my game is still balanced and since the op doesnt provide any specific situation the question he asks is sensless
On March 07 2011 00:50 morimacil wrote: Aye, banelings are the only zerg uit that never overkills.
Strictly speaking, no melee unit ever overkills because their attack has no travel time. And the baneling could qualify as a melee unit in that regard.
When seeing the OP I was hoping for a good debate on this subject. Sadly 10% read the OP, the rest just rambled on like they had any idea what the purpose of this video was.
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
I think this is correct. Marines attack instantly, and their damage is applied instantly as well. They attack in such a way that they cannot overkill. Overkill is when you waste shots on a unit. For example, say you have a 1 hp zergling, and 20 marines. You attack the zergling, and only 1 marine will fire. If you do this same thing with roaches, or hydras, all 20 of them will fire on the zergling, wasting a substantial amount of DPS. So I think what you see in games, has to do with attack range, because marines will prefer to attack what's closest to them, if all priorities are the same, but they will not overkill.
Edit: I actually think this is wrong now. Can someone check if all marines fire, or just one? I think it's just they won't overkill if there's anything else to shoot, otherwise they don't care.
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
No, I disagree. If that was the case, they would not attack at all, like the vice example: SIEGE TANKS! .
Marines and other high rate-of-fire instant-attack units don't have splash damage so it doesn't even matter if they overkill something when they have no other options.
It theoretically sets their attack on cooldown. Purely from a game-mechanic point of view, I wish to clarify that marines overkill like (almost) all the other ranged units.
It may not matter practically. But that doesn't make it wrong. Just irrelevant.
Read the damn OP. You are clearly not seeing the point of this thread. It not comparing Hydras to marine.
I W A S R E P L Y I N G T O T H E P E O P L E C R Y I N G
Learn to read and accept the context of the post. Even read my 2nd post.
Jesus christ.
I am sorry i did not read your 2nd post but you were talking about hydra range which is irrelevant to the thread. I think the OP stated pretty clearly and did a rather good analysis of the projectile vs instant. He could of even done roaches vs marine if he truly wanted to.
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.
On March 07 2011 03:56 CurLy[] wrote: The better question is who is making hydras vs terran anyway?
On March 07 2011 03:58 Ex_Matt wrote: Eventhough Marines are criminals, I think they'd be much smarter than the average Hydralisk. Also when you're playing the campaign, that commander guy takes on a whole buncha hydralisks and is even able to block their acid spines with his arm.
Not really surprised by the video, everyone knows marines have the best dps. The video doesn't utilize the hydras max range and the fact that they'd be attacking before the marines do.
Cry harder newbs.
Learn to read the OP please...
On topic:
This isn't surprising, due to the fact that insta-shot does not overkill. What I find somewhat enlightening, is that this gives me a bit of better insight into the Terran ball, and how that works. The insta-shot seems unique to Terran in that it only really exists in their common balls in a significant way.
Actually, I think Marines overkill too. It's just that they fire so fast, you can't really be sure.
But for example when watching GSL TvZ, and seeing a player with perfect stutterstep micro (MKP games I recommend), it's visible that always only one Zergling dies, while the others are not even hurt - even if there are like 12 marines. When he leaves them standing, they will spread fire.
Again, I may be wrong, but from my observations, only tanks don't overkill on the first shot.
In that case, it's usually because the (perfectly) shutterstepping marines have nothing else to shoot besides what's just barely in their attack range. If they have something else to shoot, they spread out their damage.
No, I disagree. If that was the case, they would not attack at all, like the vice example: SIEGE TANKS! .
Marines and other high rate-of-fire instant-attack units don't have splash damage so it doesn't even matter if they overkill something when they have no other options.
It theoretically sets their attack on cooldown. Purely from a game-mechanic point of view, I wish to clarify that marines overkill like (almost) all the other ranged units.
It may not matter practically. But that doesn't make it wrong. Just irrelevant.
They do not overkill, it is very easy to test in game, stop spreading misinformation.
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 04:33 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 04:33 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 04:33 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 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 Hydralisks They 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 ).
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.
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 05:11 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 05:11 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.
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.
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.
An easier test would be having 2 marines and two 1 hp observers, one of which is closer to both marines than the other, but both are in range. If there is overkill both of the marines should fire at the closer observer, taking 2 valleys to kill the observers, if there isn't, the marines will kill an observer each.
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.
An easier test would be having 2 marines and two 1 hp observers, one of which is closer to both marines than the other, but both are in range. If there is overkill both of the marines should fire at the closer observer, taking 2 valleys to kill the observers, if there isn't, the marines will kill an observer each.
this works too, i think. i think in the tests, you'll need to do it multiple times to assure that the results are consistent; if there is any variance then we'll need to find out why
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.
An easier test would be having 2 marines and two 1 hp observers, one of which is closer to both marines than the other, but both are in range. If there is overkill both of the marines should fire at the closer observer, taking 2 valleys to kill the observers, if there isn't, the marines will kill an observer each.
this works too, i think. i think in the tests, you'll need to do it multiple times to assure that the results are consistent; if there is any variance then we'll need to find out why
Yeah this seems like even better idea, 2 marines both in range of 2 observers, but one is much closer to them than other.
If there is no overkill, then really one possible explanation is smart targeting - but Dustin said that no such a thing exist. It works for Tanks because units are coming to their range not all at once, so closest tank can kill unit (with insta shoot) before it even gets to range of second tank - and thats principe of mysterious "smart targeting".
But in this 2 obs + scan test it shouldnt work, because obs will be revealed at same time. So both marines should stoot at closer observer at same time, because at the time they are both shooting observer is still alive.
But if they dont overkill, then there is something in game Blizzard is not saying or dont know about...
Lots of people tested this even during beta. Instant attacks do not overkill at all. The engine processes them in order, unit death is processed on the killing blow and the following units can no longer attack it, since it's no longer a valid target, so they acquire new targets.
On March 07 2011 05:46 Zerkaszhan wrote: Marines hard counter Hydras so this isnt a surprise it isnt realistic against terran as most of the units are cost effective when countering it
Ok, i will sum up, would you just did:
1. You found a post on teamliquid, called "insta vs. missile shot". You opened it.
2. What do you see? The first thing is a short, bold text. You ignored it. Reading? Too difficult!
3. You see a video with 12 marines fighting 12 hydras, The Marines always win.
4. There is even more text after the Video! Still, you are to lazy, so you keep ignoring those "s-e-n-t-e-n-c-e-s".
5. You hit the "reply" button and write some 100% irrelevant stuff: "Marines hard counter Hydras." This, my friend, is so wrong it isnt even funny anymore.
Good for you i am no moderator, i would totally give you (and 50% of the people who replied to the op) 2 day bans.
@topic: Like some other people already pointed out, this is interesting, but naturally the way it should be. Instant shot is superior over missle shots.
On March 07 2011 04:26 lilky wrote: CAN YOU F*CKIN RETARDS READ THE DAMN OP POST!??!!?
jesus christ stupid americans cant read the 20 words in the post
for those of you who are too stupid to understand what the OP is saying: THOSE ARE NOT NORMAL HYDRALISKS IN THE VIDEO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME STATS (health, range, rate of fire, unit collision size, movement speed, EVERYTHING) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE HYDRALISKS FIRE PROJECTILES AND THE MARINES FIRE INSTANTLY.
as a result, the marines CANNOT overkill the hydralisks do overkill
On March 07 2011 05:46 Zerkaszhan wrote: Marines hard counter Hydras so this isnt a surprise it isnt realistic against terran as most of the units are cost effective when countering it
Way to make yourself look silly. If you actually think that 24 real hydras should lose to 24 marines then you have a horrible look on balance lol
The problem is that the hydras are over killing and the marines are not. I never knew it was to such an extent though this is probably why tanks are so strong in high numbers.
I edited something into the OP, I hope that helps with reading. On the other hand, it was pretty good for uncovering people who are unwilling to read the OP, so I am torn.
On March 07 2011 06:20 tainted muffin wrote: The problem is that the hydras are over killing and the marines are not. I never knew it was to such an extent though this is probably why tanks are so strong in high numbers.
Hello tainted muffin. Respected teamliquid member lilky has a message for you:
On March 07 2011 04:26 lilky wrote: CAN YOU F*CKIN RETARDS READ THE DAMN OP POST!??!!?
jesus christ stupid americans cant read the 20 words in the post
for those of you who are too stupid to understand what the OP is saying: THOSE ARE NOT NORMAL HYDRALISKS IN THE VIDEO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME STATS (health, range, rate of fire, unit collision size, movement speed, EVERYTHING) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE HYDRALISKS FIRE PROJECTILES AND THE MARINES FIRE INSTANTLY.
as a result, the marines CANNOT overkill the hydralisks do overkill
Its actually funny that you indeed ARE an american..
On March 07 2011 06:26 Aesop wrote: I edited something into the OP, I hope that helps with reading. On the other hand, it was pretty good for uncovering people who are unwilling to read the OP, so I am torn.
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.
On March 07 2011 04:26 lilky wrote: CAN YOU F*CKIN RETARDS READ THE DAMN OP POST!??!!?
jesus christ stupid americans cant read the 20 words in the post
for those of you who are too stupid to understand what the OP is saying: THOSE ARE NOT NORMAL HYDRALISKS IN THE VIDEO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME STATS (health, range, rate of fire, unit collision size, movement speed, EVERYTHING) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE HYDRALISKS FIRE PROJECTILES AND THE MARINES FIRE INSTANTLY.
as a result, the marines CANNOT overkill the hydralisks do overkill
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
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.
this is an nice video, it really has nothing to do with the hydras or marines, but the missle attack vs insta damage. after watching and reading the post, i thought to myself, mmm there are so many ways to buff and nerf a unit, rather than just attack damage or attack speed, everything down to how often it attacks,health, armor, +damage to certain units, movement speed, its size, attack animation, even down the the way they attack ( instant or missle) all can be change to make a unit feel different and play differently.
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
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.
I don't think any more tests need to be done to establish instant > missile. It's simply a fact, and any sane minds would pick instant over missile for their units if given choices. And it is very much likely that this is intended feature of the game by blizzard.
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.
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.
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)
I think in each of those scenarios, there are so many other factors to consider. How do we balance overkill from projectile type with how a unit works in low number (1v1, even) scenarios? How does unit size (density) factor in? How does the damage intervals (damage/rate of fire) factor in?
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.
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
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.
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)
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.
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
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)
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
We knew it, we just didn't know the difference would be so massive. With siege tanks it's kind of obvious that it makes a big difference, but you don't intuitively expect it with marines.
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.
Ridiculously good micro could indeed in theory stop overkill from units with missile attacks, thats true. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 that sounds quite incredible, but so did this video before I watched it. Would be pretty cool to see your test.
It's interesting to see the difference smart targeting makes, really.
It makes me wonder, is this something that should be changed? Should all instants become missles or the other way around? Should all attacks smart target/not smart target?
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 that sounds pretty credible. Mind doing it in a video? I want to see it for my self.
On March 06 2011 23:58 Nis wrote: I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
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 can't remember exactly where I heard this, but there was TL thread in which somebody (with good credibility, IIRC >.>) explained how no two actions in Starcraft can be literally simultaneous. Where actions would be simultaneous (two marines firing), they are actually placed in an arbitrary order, with an infinitesimal delay between them. This means that when a group of marines fire "simultaneously", there is actually a (tiny, tiny, tiny) delay between each attack. This also means that technically there is always a delay between attacks being made and landing, but I believe that the hit action for an "immediate" attack like that of a marine is the next action to be processed after the fire action. This explains why two marines attacking each other can never both die. Even if they both begin attacking at what seems to be the exact same time, one will always land the final blow before the other. If the attacks were truly simultaneous, then both marines would die.
Because of this, each marine will acquire its target after all previously-made attacks have landed, making over-kill impossible.
I wish I had more concrete sources for these statements, but they do seem to align with what we see in-game. Maybe somebody else will be able to come along and back me up or contradict me with better sources.
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.
well, I have heard/read/acquired information of there being a tank "smart AI" which has nothing to do with overkill, instead the "smart AI" is designed in such a way that, if there are multiple possible targets to attack, it will automaticly choose to attack the target which has the greatest "crowd" of enemy units around it, a.k.a. it will prefer to fire at clusters of enemies, thus maximizing the splash effect.
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.
well, I have heard/read/acquired information of there being a tank "smart AI" which has nothing to do with overkill, instead the "smart AI" is designed in such a way that, if there are multiple possible targets to attack, it will automaticly choose to attack the target which has the greatest "crowd" of enemy units around it, a.k.a. it will prefer to fire at clusters of enemies, thus maximizing the splash effect.
I'm pretty sure there isn't such a thing. That would make micro pointless.
When people refer to "smart AI" for tanks, they simply mean that tanks don't overkill. In other words, zealot bombing and other such anti-tank line strats from BW don't work nearly as efficiently in SC2 as they did in SC:BW.
On March 07 2011 08:15 SheaR619 wrote: wait, someone should do it with 1 hydra vs 1 marine as well just to show the differences imo.
There wouldn't illustrate anything, because the issue is overkill. When there is a group of marines (or any other units) being attacked, then having excessive shots aimed at one target means that potential damage is wasted. If there's only one marine to target, then overkill is irrelevant, because there are no other units to be damaged.
Actually, an interesting caveat of this (that some have probably noticed in practice) is that target firing with missile attackers can actually be less efficient than a-moving in some circumstances, due to the presence of overkill.
As an example, imagine 2 groups of units that begin firing together, and have identical firing rate. Attackers have missile attack, and sufficient hitpoints to tank the Defenders' damage with negligible losses:
Scenario A: Attackers attack defenders one-to-one. In this case, each Defender dies after h_2/d_1 rounds of fire, resulting in total damage to the defenders of D_A = n_2*d_2*h_2/d_1.
Scenario 2: Attackers target fire a single defender unit each round. Supposing n_1*d_1 > h_2 (i.e., Attackers do sufficient damage to one-shot defender units), the count of defenders decreases by 1 per firing round, meaning the total damage to defenders is the sum of an arithmetic progression: D_B = d_2*n_2*(1+n_2).
Generally target firing is better, since it reduces the enemy unit count more quickly, but in cases where d_1*(1+n_2) is much greater than h_2 (i.e., when armies are large, or enemy units have low life totals), this is no longer the case. This is clearly intuitive, but some might appreciate the mathematical derivation.
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.
well, I have heard/read/acquired information of there being a tank "smart AI" which has nothing to do with overkill, instead the "smart AI" is designed in such a way that, if there are multiple possible targets to attack, it will automaticly choose to attack the target which has the greatest "crowd" of enemy units around it, a.k.a. it will prefer to fire at clusters of enemies, thus maximizing the splash effect.
i can assure you as a person who has gone over every unit in the editor with a fine comb they do not have anything like this
On March 07 2011 08:15 SheaR619 wrote: wait, someone should do it with 1 hydra vs 1 marine as well just to show the differences imo.
There wouldn't illustrate anything, because the issue is overkill. When there is a group of marines (or any other units) being attacked, then having excessive shots aimed at one target means that potential damage is wasted. If there's only one marine to target, then overkill is irrelevant, because there are no other units to be damaged.
Ya true, you will not see how instant projectile effect overkill but you will see the DPS differences in instant projectile vs projectile. My prediction is that the marine will kill the hydra because he has instant projectile but by how much? O.o
On March 07 2011 08:15 SheaR619 wrote: wait, someone should do it with 1 hydra vs 1 marine as well just to show the differences imo.
There wouldn't illustrate anything, because the issue is overkill. When there is a group of marines (or any other units) being attacked, then having excessive shots aimed at one target means that potential damage is wasted. If there's only one marine to target, then overkill is irrelevant, because there are no other units to be damaged.
Ya true, you will not see how instant projectile effect overkill but you will see the DPS differences in instant projectile vs projectile. My prediction is that the marine will kill the hydra because he has instant projectile but by how much? O.o
what? no. marine has half the hydras hp and does less dps. o.0
On March 06 2011 23:55 TangyChicken wrote: That blows my mind. Why in the world does it make such a big difference?
overdamage also know as wasted DPS. the hydras, that have the exact same stats as marines in this video, do overdamage, loosing up to 30% of there potential damage. the Marines, wich have instand shots, do not do this, it is also know as "Smart-Fire" and is also in place with siege tanks.
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.
You're right; it's a separate discussion. I still think Hydras need smart-fire. Although, it might look bad without projectiles.
just another proof that something needs to be done. (and people keep telling terran is the micro intensive race.)
during a fight targetfiring with missible based units can backfire, though this was obvious to begin with, even just a-moving is alot less efficient. this makes comparision by Stats between Units that have instant attack and missible attack nearly useless.
really interestesting find, I'm disappointed in myself that I failed to identify this as a balance metric with units outside of the tank. I might have considered it a tiny bit, but obviously the role is far more significant than anticipated.
On March 07 2011 08:15 SheaR619 wrote: wait, someone should do it with 1 hydra vs 1 marine as well just to show the differences imo.
There wouldn't illustrate anything, because the issue is overkill. When there is a group of marines (or any other units) being attacked, then having excessive shots aimed at one target means that potential damage is wasted. If there's only one marine to target, then overkill is irrelevant, because there are no other units to be damaged.
Ya true, you will not see how instant projectile effect overkill but you will see the DPS differences in instant projectile vs projectile. My prediction is that the marine will kill the hydra because he has instant projectile but by how much? O.o
what? no. marine has half the hydras hp and does less dps. o.0
I am assuming if both of them have the same stats and size and everything just like in the video. :p
i just tested it right now, Marines don't even overkill when target firing. this is huge, cause using marines you can always target fire, their firepower will distribute without wasting damage at all.
can be easily reproduced: Take 2 drones and the right amount of units to deal enough damage to kill both.
Take 8 Stalker right click them near to the drones than target fire one drone -> result 1 drone dies other live (needs another attack cycle) Take 7 Hydras right click them near to the drones than target fire -> result 1 drone dies other live (needs another attack cycle) take 14 marines right click them near to the drones than target fire -> result both drones dies (within the first attack cycle)
so besides having the advantage while A-Moving, even Target Firing has an bigger advantage makes no wonder why marines are decimating economy so fast.
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
This is a really interesting result. Why would the marauders kill less than the hydras? It would seem like the marauders and hydras should kill at exactly the same rate. If you still have this set up, is it possible to run a couple more iterations of the marauders and hydras?
The OP establishes a pretty large discrepancy between the effectiveness of instant vs missile shots and your test confirms it. However, your test also seems to show a discrepancy even within the performancy of missile shots for different units. Given the long delay and insta-kill damage, I can't imagine why this would be so...
On March 07 2011 09:02 freetgy wrote: i just tested it right now, Marines don't even overkill when target firing. this is huge, cause using marines you can always target fire, their firepower will distribute without wasting damage at all.
can be easily reproduced: Take 2 drones and the right amount of units to deal enough damage to kill both.
Take 8 Stalker right click them near to the drones than target fire one drone -> result 1 drone dies other live (needs another attack cycle) Take 7 Hydras right click them near to the drones than target fire -> result 1 drone dies other live (needs another attack cycle) take 14 marines right click them near to the drones than target fire -> result both drones dies (within the first attack cycle)
so besides having the advantage while A-Moving, even Target Firing has an bigger advantage makes no wonder why marines are decimating economy so fast.
the same happens with siege tanks, which is what made them so strong.
this video does a good job showing the difference between instashot and missile though for units like marines.
If you read the very first sentence of the post you will realize that the hydras have their stats changed to match marines. This isn't marines vs hydras, it's purely testing the difference of damage output caused by their attack animations. It's not that hard to pay attention and read the bolded sentence right above the video.
Wow, mind = blown. Didn't know that missile attacks vs Instant attacks made that big of a difference. Really good find. I wonder if the balance team for starcraft 2 overlooked the fact of missile vs instant, Or at least they didn't know it was going make that big of a difference.
I wonder something though, say if the spine from the hyrda is in mid flight to it's target and the hyrda dies, Does the missile attack die with the hyrda or does the Missile attack finish because the missile was already launched. Logically i would say it does, but who knows how the game is actually made.
This is a really interesting result. Why would the marauders kill less than the hydras? It would seem like the marauders and hydras should kill at exactly the same rate. If you still have this set up, is it possible to run a couple more iterations of the marauders and hydras?
The OP establishes a pretty large discrepancy between the effectiveness of instant vs missile shots and your test confirms it. However, your test also seems to show a discrepancy even within the performancy of missile shots for different units. Given the long delay and insta-kill damage, I can't imagine why this would be so...
Different missile animations aren't necessarily moving at the same speed. It would make sense if faster projectiles were closer in performance to instant attacks. So if Hydra spines were faster in flight than marauder grenades, they would kill more efficiently.
Thanks for the OP, which really shows the power of the auto-targeting AI. This thread has become, as Destiny would put it, a retard magnet Overlord. So many people are posting ridiculous comments that prove they did not read the OP. :D
On March 06 2011 23:58 Nis wrote: I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
well said and just what I was thinking. That must be it, I can't think of any other reason. I just didn't know it made such a huge difference. Cool video, thanks.
Wow. I knew projectiles were less effective, but not that much less effective. I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but it is it possible to modify the projectile speed? I think it would be interesting to model the effect of changing the projectile speed on how efficient the hydralisks are.
hmmmm that is interesting I sure hope blizz takes missles vs insta attack into account for balance, I'm sure they do, but the difference is so huge that is just incredible
On March 07 2011 09:56 Gummy wrote: Thanks for the OP, which really shows the power of the auto-targeting AI. This thread has become, as Destiny would put it, a retard magnet Overlord. So many people are posting ridiculous comments that prove they did not read the OP. :D
It would almost be worth re-making the thread and instead of hydra/marine just make both groups marines (or both hydras), but give one group a missile shot and one a hitscan. Then people wouldn't automatically start talking nonsense about marine vs hydra, and focus on what this thread is about (hitscan vs missile).
On March 07 2011 10:23 gurrpp wrote: I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but it is it possible to modify the projectile speed? I think it would be interesting to model the effect of changing the projectile speed on how efficient the hydralisks are.
It can be done in the editor. I think doing this to units like hydra and siege tank could be rather informative.
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
They wanted to shoot spines in sc1 too (well the description does say spines), there was just a technical limitation in sc1 supposedly. They wanted spines to be shot, but they used the splash because either the spine weren't visible or perhaps more-so it couldn't support fast-moving small sprites like that or something,
And yeah the reason why void rays and siege tanks and marines are so damn strong is because of their instant shots. the reason siege tanks don't overkill any more is because they removed the attack "projectile" delay that existed in brood war.
I think hydralisks should gain +2 damage per upgrade, because their damage is 12, and only +1 per attack sucks, especially when it's a projectile attack. Marines get +1 and they deal only HALF the damage (6), it's pretty ridiculous.
Marines also need their movement delay increased after attacking... it's so ridiculous how marines can move at like 95% of their speed while shooting. Combined with the fact that marines have an instant attack, this amplifies things even worse, because it makes for no auto kill while doing it.
I also don't know why the hell melee units like zerglings (and especially ultralisks) have such a long movement delay AND attack lag. Despite having a movement seed advantage over a worker, it takes ages and ages for a retreating drone to die to a zergling. The ultralisk is even worse. I think they might have fixed this specific issue, but I know at one point ultralisks could not deal damage to a fleeing spore/spine crawler off-creep when auto attacking, because the crawler would get away before the attack animation completes, even though ultralisk had a huge movement speed advantage.
Blizzard definitely knows about this. They take into account the "overkill" damage of projectile units when balancing units. It's ok for most units to overkill. It makes units like Terran infantry/tanks unique. Also, instant attacks aren't affected by PDDs.
I think they should just take away smartfire. No overkilling means no micro. I just have a huge problem with terran not having to micro their marines. Just doesn't sit well with me. They can easily do this by making the missles of marines so fast that it is not noticeable but since it's not exactly instant, overkill will occur? (correct me if i'm wrong about this)
banelings and tanks...fine, those make sense to have smartfire.
There are two reasons why instant attacks are better than missile attacks:
First: instant attacks deal initial damage quicker. Average damage rate is the same, but the first hit arrives faster, meaning that the opposing force loses their units slightly faster, meaning they lose DPS over the course of the fight because they lost units faster.
Second: Overkill. Instant attacks don't overkill, so no shots are wasted. Missile attacks do overkill, so some attacks are completely wasted.
On March 07 2011 10:47 Rucky wrote: I think they should just take away smartfire. No overkilling means no micro. I just have a huge problem with terran not having to micro their marines. Just doesn't sit well with me. They can easily do this by making the missles of marines so fast that it is not noticeable but since it's not exactly instant, overkill will occur? (correct me if i'm wrong about this)
banelings and tanks...fine, those make sense to have smartfire.
Blizzard already balances units to account for the overkill. If you take away the hitscan, you'll need to increase the dps of half the Terran units or they'll be severely nerfed.
On March 07 2011 10:34 KevinIX wrote: Blizzard definitely knows about this. They take into account the "overkill" damage of projectile units when balancing units. It's ok for most units to overkill. It makes units like Terran infantry/tanks unique. Also, instant attacks aren't affected by PDDs.
They only changed this for the siege tank, and only after months of seeing players complain about it and owning with it. Marines weren't modified at all, in fact quite the opposite... marines have an insane attack execution time right now compared to SC1... They don't just move then shoot like in SC1, they are moving while shooting like the phoenix, which is dumb.
Another tidbit of info, roach attacks are not instant.... which is pretty lame, because it's not a projectile either. I don't know WTF blizzard was doing there.
On March 07 2011 10:47 Rucky wrote: I think they should just take away smartfire. No overkilling means no micro. I just have a huge problem with terran not having to micro their marines. Just doesn't sit well with me. They can easily do this by making the missles of marines so fast that it is not noticeable but since it's not exactly instant, overkill will occur? (correct me if i'm wrong about this)
banelings and tanks...fine, those make sense to have smartfire.
Blizzard already balances units to account for the overkill. If you take away the hitscan, you'll need to increase the dps of half the Terran units or they'll be severely nerfed.
that's exactly what i'm saying they should do. increase dps to balance the game. DO whatever. I don't really care. Just make it so that micro is there. I hate a-move.
Didn't read the whole thread, but I just wanted to point out though, that the example is a pretty terrible one, since it makes all the units fire at the exact same time(which never happens ingame), which just makes the difference that much bigger. a-moving both sides would be a lot more realistic example.
I'd be interested to see what happens if you place the hydras in a circle and all the rines in the middle. The rines would probably still win, atleast while being equal(since there's no reason they wouldn't) but I'd assume the hydras would win when they were actually stronger, since it ain't set up to give worst possible result for overkill.
On March 07 2011 10:34 KevinIX wrote: Blizzard definitely knows about this. They take into account the "overkill" damage of projectile units when balancing units. It's ok for most units to overkill. It makes units like Terran infantry/tanks unique. Also, instant attacks aren't affected by PDDs.
They only changed this for the siege tank, and only after months of seeing players complain about it and owning with it. Marines weren't modified at all, in fact quite the opposite... marines have an insane attack execution time right now compared to SC1... They don't just move then shoot like in SC1, they are moving while shooting like the phoenix, which is dumb.
LOL
No marines cannot move and shoot at the same time, also marine rate of fire with stim is actually slower than it was in broodwar, stim is only a 50% increase instead of 100% dps increase. BW stim marines do 2x dps, SC2 marines do 1.5x dps.
On March 07 2011 10:34 KevinIX wrote: Blizzard definitely knows about this. They take into account the "overkill" damage of projectile units when balancing units. It's ok for most units to overkill. It makes units like Terran infantry/tanks unique. Also, instant attacks aren't affected by PDDs.
They only changed this for the siege tank, and only after months of seeing players complain about it and owning with it. Marines weren't modified at all, in fact quite the opposite... marines have an insane attack execution time right now compared to SC1... They don't just move then shoot like in SC1, they are moving while shooting like the phoenix, which is dumb.
LOL
No marines cannot move and shoot at the same time, also marine rate of fire with stim is actually slower than it was in broodwar, stim is only a 50% increase instead of 100% dps increase. BW stim marines do 2x dps, SC2 marines do 1.5x dps.
nony has said repeatedly that marines are like phoenixes in that they can move and shoot at the same time.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
On March 07 2011 10:34 KevinIX wrote: Blizzard definitely knows about this. They take into account the "overkill" damage of projectile units when balancing units. It's ok for most units to overkill. It makes units like Terran infantry/tanks unique. Also, instant attacks aren't affected by PDDs.
They only changed this for the siege tank, and only after months of seeing players complain about it and owning with it. Marines weren't modified at all, in fact quite the opposite... marines have an insane attack execution time right now compared to SC1... They don't just move then shoot like in SC1, they are moving while shooting like the phoenix, which is dumb.
LOL
No marines cannot move and shoot at the same time, also marine rate of fire with stim is actually slower than it was in broodwar, stim is only a 50% increase instead of 100% dps increase. BW stim marines do 2x dps, SC2 marines do 1.5x dps.
nony has said repeatedly that marines are like phoenixes in that they can move and shoot at the same time.
Ugh...if marine can shoot while they run then while im stimming marine away they should be able to kill the baneling that are behind them. I think nony just referencing marine like that because marine shoots really fast but in reality, marine can NOT shoot why they are moving. This is common knowledge.
Wow, that's fascinating. Goes a long way to explaining why marines are better than their stats might show (when compared to a unit with very similar stats per resource like a hydra, with a different attack animation).
I think all units should have projectiles, even if they're invisible and or super fast. That way all units would overkill. Having units not overkill just seems too efficient and sorta noobifies the game. Balance aside, i just don't think its good for starcraft.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
On March 07 2011 11:49 pzea469 wrote: I think all units should have projectiles, even if they're invisible and or super fast. That way all units would overkill. Having units not overkill just seems too efficient and sorta noobifies the game. Balance aside, i just don't think its good for starcraft.
Removing the smart AI would also reinstate overkill to a large extent. BW is probably the best example.
Interesting find, it's too bad so many people do not have the ability to read. It's unfortunate that Blizzard HAS the ability to give every missile unit smartfire, but don't.
On March 07 2011 12:11 pandaminion wrote: Interesting find, it's too bad so many people do not have the ability to read. It's unfortunate that Blizzard HAS the ability to give every missile unit smartfire, but don't.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
Maybe OP should of choosen marine and marauders instead of marine and hydras. Then there would be less complaint :3. Since when you compare 2 OP units the OP unit always win right (sarcasm)? :D
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
That doesn't even make sense considering they both have a missile attack.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
Maybe OP should of choosen marine and marauders instead of marine and hydras. Then there would be less complaint :3. Since when you compare 2 OP units the OP unit always win right (sarcasm)? :D
It would still be the same thing. *IM NOT SAYING MARINES ARE OP* but look how they destroy marauders because of their instant attack!! You be the judge!
I'm not trying to say anything that the OP is talking about is right or wrong - I'm just annoyed by the endless amount of threads that try to disguise themselves as something other than balance discussion, when it's clearly balance discussion.
On March 07 2011 11:49 pzea469 wrote: I think all units should have projectiles, even if they're invisible and or super fast. That way all units would overkill. Having units not overkill just seems too efficient and sorta noobifies the game. Balance aside, i just don't think its good for starcraft.
Removing the smart AI would also reinstate overkill to a large extent. BW is probably the best example.
I don't think there is any targetting AI in this game different than BW, otherwise you wouldn't see the overkill issues we see with all these projectile attacks. The issue is that some units' attack in this game have no travel time, while in BW, most if not all did have travel time, even if there wasn't a visible projectile.
One more thing: this also explains why immortals do quite well also... they deal an assload of damage, so considering that none of their shots get wasted, it is a pretty big deal.
I think doing this test as Marines vs. Tweaked Marauders would have saved a lot of "OMG BUFF ZERG NERF TERRAN" posts.
I think it is quite interesting that missile shots have such a large detrimental effect versus instant shots, I had never really considered this before. Interesting and informative post, OP.
On March 06 2011 23:58 Nis wrote: I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
probably one of the largest reasons, not to mention insta shot opens up and hits the taget first so is already ahead in damage.
Wow, I never really thought that maybe the reason marines are so strong is that, like tanks, they dont overkill. I guess that makes sense the more I think about it.
On March 07 2011 12:28 Tektos wrote: I think doing this test as Marines vs. Tweaked Marauders would have saved a lot of "OMG BUFF ZERG NERF TERRAN" posts.
I think it is quite interesting that missile shots have such a large detrimental effect versus instant shots, I had never really considered this before. Interesting and informative post, OP.
Well that's likely yes, but one issue is that aside from baneling which doesn't really count, and infested terran which also doesn't really count, zerg have no instant damage units.
Hydralisks are a unit with a damage delay, and gain only +1 damage per upgrade. It would make sense if hydras got +2 per upgrade, considering they deal double the damage of a marine, and their attack damage is not instant which makes for more wasteful shots
Protoss has immortal, sentry, void ray, archon, mothership (not that it really counts)
Terran has siege tank, marine, viking ground, thor ground, ghost, planetary fortress, hellion, auto turret
Another issue less-related to instant attack and more just overall game balance is void rays. Zerg cannot counter void rays with any equal supply army (excluding queens), even 2 mutalisks per 1 void ray doesn't win, since mutalisks do no better than corruptors vs void rays really.
On March 07 2011 12:41 RaiKageRyu wrote: I always found it funny that a bullet travels faster than a Stalkers laser.
btw, Roaches don't have projectile right? but i think they can still overkill...
yes I mentioned in one of my posts, roaches have no actual projectile, but their attack is still delayed. It's terrible inequality against zerg in that sense, considering that protoss and terran have quite a few instant-attack units.
The only other non-projectile I know of that does overshoot is the colossus
I think you're all neglecting the main reason why the marines win hugely in these battles, and it isn't overkill, although that does help.
If you have instant vs. missile attacks, the instant attacks hit first, and score kills faster. This means in some cases, units on one side will die first, and get less attacks. This effect snowballs, as one side has larger dps than the other.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
That doesn't even make sense considering they both have a missile attack.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
ok
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
Maybe OP should of choosen marine and marauders instead of marine and hydras. Then there would be less complaint :3. Since when you compare 2 OP units the OP unit always win right (sarcasm)? :D
It would still be the same thing. *IM NOT SAYING MARINES ARE OP* but look how they destroy marauders because of their instant attack!! You be the judge!
I'm not trying to say anything that the OP is talking about is right or wrong - I'm just annoyed by the endless amount of threads that try to disguise themselves as something other than balance discussion, when it's clearly balance discussion.
Hahaha, i feel ya. I just wanted to push yo button! :o
Btw, marauder and hydras would not be the same thing. I think hydras bullet moves faster than marauder rockets. So if we set everything equal it might give a very interesting result as well. I think someone else in this post has already done it and said this though. Different attack animation has different speed projectiles so if you set everything the same it will not always give same result per projectile.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is. But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
That doesn't even make sense considering they both have a missile attack.
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Hi, how is what you wrote relevant?
On March 07 2011 11:08 TheJoyBringer wrote:
On March 07 2011 10:54 Angra wrote: I'm going to 1a two types of units into each other. Whichever one wins is overpowered and should be nerfed.
Lol wait, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to get across here is.
But I think you're not getting the OP?
*this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* But look how they decimate these hydralisks when given equal values because they have an instant shot. But *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* but should there really be that big of a difference between instant and missle shot? *this video doesn't say that marines are OP or hydralisks are UP!!* you be the judge!!!
sorry I guess I'm just tired of all these threads of people giving completely random examples of the way the game works and then cleverly hiding their balance theory by having a disclaimer saying they aren't discussing balance theory
So if he used marauders instead of the hydras and set all the values equal to the marine, would you be appeased?
Maybe OP should of choosen marine and marauders instead of marine and hydras. Then there would be less complaint :3. Since when you compare 2 OP units the OP unit always win right (sarcasm)? :D
It would still be the same thing. *IM NOT SAYING MARINES ARE OP* but look how they destroy marauders because of their instant attack!! You be the judge!
I'm not trying to say anything that the OP is talking about is right or wrong - I'm just annoyed by the endless amount of threads that try to disguise themselves as something other than balance discussion, when it's clearly balance discussion.
I'm not sure if you realize (I might very well be mistaken), but in the video the hydralisks have all the stats of a marine, they just used a hydralisk because it's probably simpler than to manually duplicate and change marine's weapon so that it uses a projectile. People aren't talking about imbalance because of the units involved, but because of the mechanics overall. The OP wasn't discussing such things, but some people in the topic are.
On March 07 2011 12:28 Tektos wrote: I think doing this test as Marines vs. Tweaked Marauders would have saved a lot of "OMG BUFF ZERG NERF TERRAN" posts.
I think it is quite interesting that missile shots have such a large detrimental effect versus instant shots, I had never really considered this before. Interesting and informative post, OP.
Well that's likely yes, but one issue is that aside from baneling which doesn't really count, and infested terran which also doesn't really count, zerg have no instant damage units.
Hydralisks are a unit with a damage delay, and gain only +1 damage per upgrade. It would make sense if hydras got +2 per upgrade, considering they deal double the damage of a marine, and their attack damage is not instant which makes for more wasteful shots
Protoss has immortal, sentry, void ray, archon, mothership (not that it really counts)
Terran has siege tank, marine, viking ground, thor ground, ghost, planetary fortress, hellion, auto turret
Another issue less-related to instant attack and more just overall game balance is void rays. Zerg cannot counter void rays with any equal supply army (excluding queens), even 2 mutalisks per 1 void ray doesn't win, since mutalisks do no better than corruptors vs void rays really.
Think you missed my point, the reason I said that was because this thread wasn't intended as a "BUFF ZERG PLEASE" thread, it was stating the advantages of instant attacking units. Using two units from the same race would remove the off-topic racial imbalance whine posts.
Using 2 units from the same race wouldnt really change much. The thread is basically: "look at how incredibly powerful instant attacks are compared to missile attacks" After that, no matter the units you used to demonstrate the mechanic in itself, its always just a matter of time before someone goes: "Hey, look! This mechanic is super powerful, and somehow terran has a massive amount of units using that mechanic compared to the other races! wtf?" And then from there it snowballs into balance discussion anyway.
- the instashot mechanic is way more powerful than the missile one - terran got the better end of the instashot vs missile deal Making a demonstration with marauders instead of hydras wouldnt really hide that fact, and/or stop ppl from crying out that terran is imba
Please don't compare the target AI in SC2 with BW, in SC2 units die the moment they reach 0 hp. In BW a units that reaches 0 hp still "lives" for one more frame, that with the fact that there is no random delay like in SC2 leads to massive overkill. The higher the unit count the harder the instant shot units rape the projectile ones.
On March 07 2011 13:12 Tektos wrote: Think you missed my point
no I think you kind of missed mine. Morimacil covers it in-depth and explains it better.
On March 07 2011 13:31 morimacil wrote: Using 2 units from the same race wouldnt really change much. The thread is basically: "look at how incredibly powerful instant attacks are compared to missile attacks" After that, no matter the units you used to demonstrate the mechanic in itself, its always just a matter of time before someone goes: "Hey, look! This mechanic is super powerful, and somehow terran has a massive amount of units using that mechanic compared to the other races! wtf?" And then from there it snowballs into balance discussion anyway.
- the instashot mechanic is way more powerful than the missile one - terran got the better end of the instashot vs missile deal Making a demonstration with marauders instead of hydras wouldnt really hide that fact, and/or stop ppl from crying out that terran is imba
My point is that the only thing it would stop are the people complaining about racial imbalance because they didn't realize that the hydras are tweaked to marine stats.
On March 07 2011 13:37 CountBarq wrote: so if you had insane apm you could render this entire thread moot?
Yup If you had enough APM to control each individual unit and what they are shooting at for every single shot within your maxed army, you could achieve the same thing that a-moved marines do, and render the whole thread moot.
IMO, the video-maker should have had 2 sets of marines instead of marines vs hydras. He did state that the hydras were tweaked to be exactly the same as the marines, only with a projectile attack, though the fact that he used hydras instead of marines only serves to increase misunderstanding.
If he had used tweaked marines vs normal marines, then more of the debate would focus on the implications of insta-shot vs projectile shot instead of all the confusion over the hydra stats.
On March 07 2011 13:37 CountBarq wrote: so if you had insane apm you could render this entire thread moot?
Yup If you had enough APM to control each individual unit and what they are shooting at for every single shot within your maxed army, you could achieve the same thing that a-moved marines do, and render the whole thread moot.
yeah that's one of the reasons why the newest super-modded SC1 AIs that have come out in the last few years are so damn strong. They can focus fire like mad, they don't waste shots, and they can pull their units out of combat if it gets low on health,
Haha that's cool, but I guess it should be expected; a small difference in a battle will come out to be a huge difference in the aftermath.
I think the difference between instant-shoot and projectile is fine; it adds more dynamic to the game and makes some units more micro-able etc. and again, just adds depth.
I also just realized that Hydras have instant in SC1 (not that you could really step-micro anyways) but projectiles in SC2. I think it would be cool if Hydras had their instant acid (who misses the acid?!?!) spray/spikes again :D and you hear that sound effect xD. It would be interesting if Blizzard changed the Hydra's attack to instant if they decide to change them at all; it wouldn't effect the damage/HP (which would be a problem; think +1 Zealots vs Zerglings). But right now Marines are supposed to be better than Hydras, so that likely mess that up.
The video is really portraying the very worst case - it even syncs up all the hydra shots (they all shoot at exactly the same time since they are all in range of enemies from start to finish). It'd probably already be much less of a deal if the unit groups walked towards each other before fighting instead of spawning the way they do in the video.
On March 07 2011 13:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: I also just realized that Hydras have instant in SC1 (not that you could really step-micro anyways) but projectiles in SC2. I think it would be cool if Hydras had their instant acid (who misses the acid?!?!) spray/spikes again :D and you hear that sound effect xD. It would be interesting if Blizzard changed the Hydra's attack to instant if they decide to change them at all;
Well I don't know if the attack was instant in BW, I don't know if ANY attack was instant (I don't think so). In SC1 they wanted it to be a projectile, but aparently there was a technical limitation so they used the splash animation (even though it's description is needle spines). Even if they did change it so that it's not a projectile— which wouldn't make much sense because in SC1 it wasn't supposed to be like that— it's possible that they wouldn't make it instant. For instance, roach isn't a projectile, but it also isn't instant and therefor overshoots.
I think the fix should START with increasing hydralisk upgrade damage, because regardless of this whole projectile thing, hydras deal double the damage of a marine per shot, but gain the same amount of damage per upgrade... it's pretty damn unfair. Hydras are just too weak in general also, and need something like a speed upgrade, another 10 health, a damage bonus, or a base damage increase.
On March 07 2011 00:24 mikell wrote: I don't see any real reason why hydras don't have their acid spit insta attack like BW.
Balancing, perhaps. They were ridiculously powerful at 90hp and .75 delay. At 80hp and .83 delay they are still good against Protoss. Without overkill they would destroy Gateway units.
It isn't acid spit' for the Hydralisk's attack in BW.. name clearly states Needle Spines.. also, Grooved Spines range upgrade wouldn't make sense for acid spit.
Please some mod edit the post to point out the hydra are marine stats. This proves next to nothing in the actual game...It's interesting in game mechanic anyhow, not relevant to actual playing
On March 07 2011 16:33 hmsrenown wrote: Please some mod edit the post to point out the hydra are marine stats. This proves next to nothing in the actual game...It's interesting in game mechanic anyhow, not relevant to actual playing
On March 06 2011 23:50 FortuneSyn wrote: 24 tweaked hydras vs 24 marines.
all hydra stats (collision size, hp, attack dmg and shot delays) were tweaked to match the marine. The only difference between the 2 in this video is that the hydra shoots a missile, the marine shoots instantly.
Sometimes i wonder if people even read the OP before they reply.
The video is really portraying the very worst case - it even syncs up all the hydra shots (they all shoot at exactly the same time since they are all in range of enemies from start to finish). It'd probably already be much less of a deal if the unit groups walked towards each other before fighting instead of spawning the way they do in the video.
This is interesting; perhaps another test? :D
well no because that's the point of the test
to show that the missile is ineffective
the same is seen with mutas, phoenixes, stalkers, roaches, marauders, etc
all of which, when fired @ once, can accidentally overshoot
where as the marine auto takes a new target (since it's bullet travel time is instant) and begin blasting away
On March 07 2011 12:49 Whitewing wrote: If you have instant vs. missile attacks, the instant attacks hit first, and score kills faster. This means in some cases, units on one side will die first, and get less attacks. This effect snowballs, as one side has larger dps than the other.
This does not factor in to the results in the video. I've explained it like three times in this thread already.
I honestly think this was unintended, And I think the reasoning was to allow PDD to affect the hydralisk. As it stands, no one makes either because there was no way they thought that marines would shred as hard as they do vs zerg and especially the hydralisk. It's the reason why hydras do so well vs stalkers that are also missile fire. I'm not sure changing either type would be a solution, it would make PDD way too strong TvT if they shot projectiles. They need to reduce the damage of marines to take the huge benefit of hitscan into effect. It's pretty crazy that equal stats it makes THAT much difference, that can't be intended.
Since this makes so much difference, we need to collect data about "effective" DPS compared Marines/Insta-Shot Units.
so creating pure armies of missile based units with equal dps (statwise) then compare the real dmg output on units.
i think taking melee units would be the best to use for comparisions since they can't attack back while in hold position.
Recording the time needed for total kill (means XXX effective DMG dealt in XXX Time) With that information we can calculate effective DPS rates for each missile based unit.
Therefore the effective DPS Bonus an insta-shot unit has over missible shot. (or how much less "real" DPS a missible based unit has)
This also adds up with Upgrades obviously a upgraded marine only did +1 damage per attack (meaning 1,2 dps) because of the insta shot effect, missible based units gain less from Attack upgrades since overkill can increase.
On March 07 2011 19:40 Ultramus wrote: I honestly think this was unintended, And I think the reasoning was to allow PDD to affect the hydralisk. As it stands, no one makes either because there was no way they thought that marines would shred as hard as they do vs zerg and especially the hydralisk. It's the reason why hydras do so well vs stalkers that are also missile fire. I'm not sure changing either type would be a solution, it would make PDD way too strong TvT if they shot projectiles. They need to reduce the damage of marines to take the huge benefit of hitscan into effect. It's pretty crazy that equal stats it makes THAT much difference, that can't be intended.
Marines dont shred Hydras at all. Marines dont shred Hydras at all. Marines dont shred Hydras at all.
Hydras are actually a very good fighting unit against terran bio. Its their slow movement (have fun catching stimmed running marines with hydras off creep) and the fact that they get roflestomped by tanks what makes them a bad choice against terran.
i mean, no one would say marauders are bad, even though their missles move even slower than the hydra ones. Give marauders marine stats and let them fight marines. i wouldnt be surprised if even 3/0 marauders still lose.
I like how this thread is all about hydra vs marine because no one understands that the point of this thread is insta vs missile ONLY. You can't get anything else out of that video except that units that attack instantly have an advantage over units that fire a missile ASSUMING all units have the same health/DPS.
On March 07 2011 16:33 hmsrenown wrote: Please some mod edit the post to point out the hydra are marine stats. This proves next to nothing in the actual game...It's interesting in game mechanic anyhow, not relevant to actual playing
On March 06 2011 23:50 FortuneSyn wrote: 24 tweaked hydras vs 24 marines.
all hydra stats (collision size, hp, attack dmg and shot delays) were tweaked to match the marine. The only difference between the 2 in this video is that the hydra shoots a missile, the marine shoots instantly.
Sometimes i wonder if people even read the OP before they reply.
Sometimes I wonder if you've even read the OP. The guy you quoted is exactly right...
On March 08 2011 02:31 Uhh Negative wrote: I like how this thread is all about hydra vs marine because no one understands that the point of this thread is insta vs missile ONLY. You can't get anything else out of that video except that units that attack instantly have an advantage over units that fire a missile ASSUMING all units have the same health/DPS.
On March 07 2011 16:33 hmsrenown wrote: Please some mod edit the post to point out the hydra are marine stats. This proves next to nothing in the actual game...It's interesting in game mechanic anyhow, not relevant to actual playing
On March 06 2011 23:50 FortuneSyn wrote: 24 tweaked hydras vs 24 marines.
all hydra stats (collision size, hp, attack dmg and shot delays) were tweaked to match the marine. The only difference between the 2 in this video is that the hydra shoots a missile, the marine shoots instantly.
Sometimes i wonder if people even read the OP before they reply.
Sometimes I wonder if you've even read the OP. The guy you quoted is exactly right...
Except the guy you quoted is exactly right, since the original "please edit" post was posted after the OP was actually edited.
Can you try the test again ..with the hydra's range increase slightly like +1.
I have a hunch , that because the marines shoot instant, their volley of fire..hits the hydra first. With Hydra's range increased..the hydra's volley hits the marines at the same time.
It's quite obvious that missile attacks are greatly inferior to instant. The video is a nice way of showing just how much better instant is. Now if you put in a Raven in both instances to use a PDD, that would just show how much better instant fire really is.
On March 06 2011 23:55 OFCORPSE wrote: That's sick. They were instant in BW right? why did they decide to shoot spines instead of that acid spit anyway.
Good luck with trying to avoid the balance discussion though
Hmmm not entirely sure but the lore of starcraft tells you that hydras actually shoot spines not acid, but broodwar didnt have enough graphic quality in order to do that
I didn't catch if this was mentioned or not, but what about the size of these units, are they the same? Check if you get similar results if you put the hydra attack on a marine. Also towards the end not all of the marines are even firing
Could you repeat this experiment with siege tanks against amove marines? Tanks using missiles. I am curious to see if there would be the same amount of overkill.
On March 08 2011 05:45 T0fuuu wrote: Could you repeat this experiment with siege tanks against amove marines? Tanks using missiles. I am curious to see if there would be the same amount of overkill.
1) Tanks splash 2) Tanks shoot slower 3) Tanks have smart-AI which auto spreads shots 4) Tanks are armoured and have more armour
In siege mode anyway
I'd like to see marines removed of auto- non-overkill...
Not to mention missile shots are affected by PDD. Out of curiosity, did instant attacks ever overkill in BW? Like marines/hydras? I know siege tanks only overkilled because it wasn't instant but had a half second delay, despite not actually having any missile.
On March 08 2011 05:45 T0fuuu wrote: Could you repeat this experiment with siege tanks against amove marines? Tanks using missiles. I am curious to see if there would be the same amount of overkill.
1) Tanks splash 2) Tanks shoot slower 3) Tanks have smart-AI which auto spreads shots 4) Tanks are armoured and have more armour
In siege mode anyway
I'd like to see marines removed of auto- non-overkill...
It's not smart AI, it's the same AI marines have and that all other instant attack units have.
It's important to remember that missile shot can have advantages when it comes to duration effects. Currently this only really applies to the Marauder as far as I know, but the fact that different shells will hit the opponent at different time increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off once the first loses effect. Admittedly this is a niche case, but it's not hard to imagine other future abilities that may benefit.
On March 08 2011 07:14 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's important to remember that missile shot can have advantages when it comes to duration effects. Currently this only really applies to the Marauder as far as I know, but the fact that different shells will hit the opponent at different time increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off once the first loses effect. Admittedly this is a niche case, but it's not hard to imagine other future abilities that may benefit.
Can you elaborate why it benefits missile effects (that it increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off). I'm not necessarily doubting you, I just don't see it through your explanation.
On March 08 2011 07:14 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's important to remember that missile shot can have advantages when it comes to duration effects. Currently this only really applies to the Marauder as far as I know, but the fact that different shells will hit the opponent at different time increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off once the first loses effect. Admittedly this is a niche case, but it's not hard to imagine other future abilities that may benefit.
Not making any sense. Be it an instant or delayed attack, the frequency of the attack remains the same, there is just an initial lag for the delayed attack, which delays the slow. I would even go as far as to say that lag is NOT desirable/favorable, due to units being able to change directions and run away unslowed for a small period of time before the shot hits.
On March 08 2011 07:14 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's important to remember that missile shot can have advantages when it comes to duration effects. Currently this only really applies to the Marauder as far as I know, but the fact that different shells will hit the opponent at different time increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off once the first loses effect. Admittedly this is a niche case, but it's not hard to imagine other future abilities that may benefit.
Not making any sense. Be it an instant or delayed attack, the frequency of the attack remains the same, there is just an initial lag for the delayed attack, which delays the slow. I would even go as far as to say that lag is NOT desirable/favorable, due to units being able to change directions and run away unslowed for a small period of time before the shot hits.
Two Marauders are shooting a zealot that starts off in range. With instant attacks, each Marauder hits at the exact same time, and thus the slows completely overlap. With projectile attacks, each hit will be spaced out somewhat depending on the differences in the distance between each marauder and the zealot. The initial slow is delayed by the travel time of the projectile. However, since the hits are taking place at slightly different times, the slow from the second shot will still be in effect when the slow from the first hit wears off.
Note the this benefit will be most significant when the duration of the on hit effect is less than the refire time of the attacking unit.
However, if we have say, several zealots instead of one, the slowed zealot will lag behind its fellows and thus not be auto attacked by kiting marauders. In that case, having an extra bit of slow on one zealot while your guys start to attack another one isn't bad at all.
That being said, I think instant attacks would still be better. OTOH, projectile type does seem to play a role in overall unit design - the ability to protect tanks from marauders via PDD certainly appears to be an intentional feature.
On March 08 2011 07:14 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's important to remember that missile shot can have advantages when it comes to duration effects. Currently this only really applies to the Marauder as far as I know, but the fact that different shells will hit the opponent at different time increases the likelihood of getting an immediate slow off once the first loses effect. Admittedly this is a niche case, but it's not hard to imagine other future abilities that may benefit.
Not making any sense. Be it an instant or delayed attack, the frequency of the attack remains the same, there is just an initial lag for the delayed attack, which delays the slow. I would even go as far as to say that lag is NOT desirable/favorable, due to units being able to change directions and run away unslowed for a small period of time before the shot hits.
Two Marauders are shooting a zealot that starts off in range. With instant attacks, each Marauder hits at the exact same time, and thus the slows completely overlap. With projectile attacks, each hit will be spaced out somewhat depending on the differences in the distance between each marauder and the zealot. The initial slow is delayed by the travel time of the projectile. However, since the hits are taking place at slightly different times, the slow from the second shot will still be in effect when the slow from the first hit wears off.
Note the this benefit will be most significant when the duration of the on hit effect is less than the refire time of the attacking unit.
However, if we have say, several zealots instead of one, the slowed zealot will lag behind its fellows and thus not be auto attacked by kiting marauders. In that case, having an extra bit of slow on one zealot while your guys start to attack another one isn't bad at all.
That being said, I think instant attacks would still be better. OTOH, projectile type does seem to play a role in overall unit design - the ability to protect tanks from marauders via PDD certainly appears to be an intentional feature.
no if the attacks were instant each marauders still wouldn't attack at the same time because like you said: "each hit will be spaced out somewhat depending on the differences in the distance between each marauder and the zealot."
On March 08 2011 05:45 T0fuuu wrote: Could you repeat this experiment with siege tanks against amove marines? Tanks using missiles. I am curious to see if there would be the same amount of overkill.
1) Tanks splash 2) Tanks shoot slower 3) Tanks have smart-AI which auto spreads shots 4) Tanks are armoured and have more armour
In siege mode anyway
I'd like to see marines removed of auto- non-overkill...
You missed the point. Tanks are instant hit and dont have smart ai so they will not fire on units that are dead. We dont have anything in the game which is a missile and does a large amount of splash so i want to see what it looks like.
You missed the point. Tanks are instant hit and dont have smart ai so they will not fire on units that are dead. We dont have anything in the game which is a missile and does a large amount of splash so i want to see what it looks like.
it seems like it's about as useful as comparing melee vs ranged attack.
Well, thats one way to look at it. And I would agree if they weren't both ranged.
The big point of this is: because a unit has a missile attack, it suddenly overkills, and in some situations that means a lot of wasted dps. So, instant attacks makes units distribute their fire very evenly between targets (I would go so far as to say very unrealistically even) when firing at huge groups of enemies. And since there is no stat on the units benefiting from this effect telling us, the players, its easy to miss when you compare units.
Now whether blizz is balancing for this or not, and which race benefits from it the least and most, they are different (but related) issues.
OMG. This is huge find. Instashot is worth +3 upgrades. It's like marines have 9 dps by default and get even more with upgrades. No wonder units which insta shoot like marines and tanks are so good. I wondered why sentries used to be a good fighting unit while having shitty stats, there it is.
You missed the point. Tanks are instant hit and dont have smart ai so they will not fire on units that are dead. We dont have anything in the game which is a missile and does a large amount of splash so i want to see what it looks like.
thor anti air ?
Thor splash cant really be compared to tank splash unless 20 marines can stack on top of each other.
You missed the point. Tanks are instant hit and dont have smart ai so they will not fire on units that are dead. We dont have anything in the game which is a missile and does a large amount of splash so i want to see what it looks like.
thor anti air ?
Thor splash cant really be compared to tank splash unless 20 marines can stack on top of each other.
You missed the point. Tanks are instant hit and dont have smart ai so they will not fire on units that are dead. We dont have anything in the game which is a missile and does a large amount of splash so i want to see what it looks like.
thor anti air ?
Thor splash cant really be compared to tank splash unless 20 marines can stack on top of each other.
Seeker missiles?
Yes.Comparing probably the slowest missile in the game to instant hit will really be a great way to demonstrate the difference in effeciency between the two ways of dealing damage.
Are you guys just arguing for semantics or is your only purpose in this thread to do 1 liners and contribute nothing to the discussion?
Anyways I am still keen to see what tanks do with a fast projectile speed compared to their instant hit.
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.
Zerg: Baneling Infested Terran
does it apply to beanlings to? ive seen some video where terran drops 1 marine from mediv to blow up some beanlings they fly over, and i was quite sure like 5-6 explode from a single marine
On March 06 2011 23:58 Nis wrote: I think the main reason why instant shots have such a huge adv over missile shots is the fact that the ai targeting for instant shots make it impossible for units with instant shots to do overkill, but thats not the case for missile shots.
Eg 2 hydra fires 1 after another at a marine with only 6 hp left leads to quite a significant dps loss
I feel this warrants repeating. Insta-shots simply can't be wasted in the same way that missile attacks can be.
If you want to confirm that it's actually overkill behind the results, give both units something like 1k hitpoints and make each attack do 1 damage, then go afk for a bit. in that scenario the damage lost to overkill will be almost insignificant so the results should be almost even.
Did anyone mention the animations already? Hydralisk has the damagepoint(where the missile flies out of the hydra) not instant, whereas marines have the damagepoint first and then the animation. This will add maybe 0.1 or 0.2 sec to the delay which is not on behalf of missile fly speed.
Compare for example stutter stepping for roaches and marines. Roaches wiull first do their little animation and only at the end the projectile will come out. You can cancel the animation roaches won´t attack, but you can´t do that with marines.
Just wanted to add this, I think it´s another puzzle piece to consider. Comes to mind, Thor ground attack has an animation, but is still instanthit. Same test with thors and hydralisks, the hydralisks would win by far, even though thor has instanthit.
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.
Zerg: Baneling Infested Terran
does it apply to beanlings to? ive seen some video where terran drops 1 marine from mediv to blow up some beanlings they fly over, and i was quite sure like 5-6 explode from a single marine
That's because it takes more than 1 baneling to kill a marine
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.
Zerg: Baneling Infested Terran
does it apply to beanlings to? ive seen some video where terran drops 1 marine from mediv to blow up some beanlings they fly over, and i was quite sure like 5-6 explode from a single marine
That's because it takes more than 1 baneling to kill a marine
im 99% certain banelings work the same way as tanks, if you surround a command centre with banelings, then attack it, if they worked like a 'projectile' every baneling would die, this isnt the case; only enough to kill the command centre explode.
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.
Zerg: Baneling Infested Terran
does it apply to beanlings to? ive seen some video where terran drops 1 marine from mediv to blow up some beanlings they fly over, and i was quite sure like 5-6 explode from a single marine
That's because it takes more than 1 baneling to kill a marine
im 99% certain banelings work the same way as tanks, if you surround a command centre with banelings, then attack it, if they worked like a 'projectile' every baneling would die, this isnt the case; only enough to kill the command centre explode.
That makes some sense, because the banelings will surround the command center, they will all dart towards it and begin blowing up until it dies since it is instant then the moment it is dead the remaining banes now target something else This is probably why banes are more cost effective than other zerg units.
the problem with instashot IMO is that for noobs, it doesn't mean as much in straight up battles, yes it is stronger than missile shot due to the mechanics of how it works, however, for pros it puts a rather high skill ceiling so people with the apm and practiced timing can literally make marines exponentially better whether it be stutter step or splitting (foxer style).
now going offtopic regarding implications of stutter step micro:
as for marines in early game zvt, the 2rax (12/12 [this cuts OC]one not the standard 12/14) is slowly making a reappearance, which, the 12/12 one hits at a very critical timing regardless of the opening from a Z, and adding in the stutter step, the marines just do too much dps and have "too much mobility with firing"
so i would propose either making marines missile attack
OR
significantly reducing the acceleration of marines (to begin moving again after shooting) and significantly increasing the the deceleration of marines, to make the stutter step less effective because as in, vs slow lings its ridiculous.
EPT
(ofc this is less than optimal but something to consider)
