Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 738

On August 29 2013 20:07 NarutO wrote:


Very different options are possible. As said, we need to take into account that Zerg can make more than one overseer and if all overseers can deactivate two mines it might be too much. Maybe play a bit with the ability. Either make it 150 energy to DEACTIVATE a mine or make it 100 energy and decrease splash damage of it / range of it / activation time of it.

There are tons of options and obviously you need to have some aspects to it and it would need testing. And as you said, potentially not just on mines, but maybe in general against units or something.

On August 29 2013 20:18 lolfail9001 wrote:

Only on 30 seconds! As in stops mine from working (and stops cooling down too!) at all for those 30 seconds.

On August 29 2013 20:22 NarutO wrote:


30 seconds is very long as well. Maybe make it 10 seconds? Zergs can deactivate to get the engagement , but they cannot be safe during all of the fight etc. We need to realize that 10 ingame seconds during fights are already long, 30 seconds would probably kill it. As said, this would need testing (custom maps for huge playerbase) and tweaking. Theoretical talk ... is so useless at that point. Anyways, was just crossing my mind =)

On August 29 2013 20:07 NarutO wrote:


Very different options are possible. As said, we need to take into account that Zerg can make more than one overseer and if all overseers can deactivate two mines it might be too much. Maybe play a bit with the ability. Either make it 150 energy to DEACTIVATE a mine or make it 100 energy and decrease splash damage of it / range of it / activation time of it.

There are tons of options and obviously you need to have some aspects to it and it would need testing. And as you said, potentially not just on mines, but maybe in general against units or something.

On August 29 2013 20:49 LSN wrote:

They could e.g. change the costs of siege tanks from 150:125 to 100:150 or 75:175 or 100:175. In addition tothis they could change thor costs from 300:200 to 350:150 or 400:125, whatever.

This would result into tanks can be more easily combined with bio/mine and thors less. More tanks in a bio/mine army would make terran less mobile and therefore create other situations and slower terran attacks. If the bio/mine/tank mixture then gets too strong other things can be adjusted to fix things..

On August 29 2013 20:49 LSN wrote:
Also I would try stuff with swarmhosts, as they are quite bad in their current shape. Too many of them seem too strong and need full commitment (what is most of the times not possible), low numbers do nothing. Easy solution would be to limit swarmhosts to something like the number of queens a zerg has, or the summed up number of hatches+queens a zerg has. In addition lower the costs of swarmhosts alot so they get used in low numbers. Hosts should be a support unit only, they would become such a unit with these changes. Would love to see bio/mine/tank play against muta/ling/bane/hosts which would result in some siege battles. Hosts then help to deal with mines and give Z some air to breath during the attacks etc.

There is alot of stuff possible to instantly make the game more versatile. Blizzard is lacking creativity there.

On August 29 2013 21:02 Sissors wrote:

Yes it is an easy solution. Also a very ugly, horrible 'solution'. Completely arbitrary restrictions do not improve the game.

On August 29 2013 21:02 Sissors wrote:

Yes it is an easy solution. Also a very ugly, horrible 'solution'. Completely arbitrary restrictions do not improve the game.

On August 29 2013 20:05 lolfail9001 wrote:

contaminate costing 100 energy that is useful on units? +1!

There is alot of stuff possible to instantly make the game more versatile. Blizzard is lacking creativity there.

On August 29 2013 21:07 LSN wrote:
maybe terrans would need them with a few swarmhosts being up for defense in the mix with ling/bane and spines get a bit stronger? Also if tanks had +massive damage they could help to deal with zergs ultralisk transition.




You dont get the point of it. Zergs have anyway 4-5 queens at least. Lets say e,g, swarmhost cost get reduced to 100-75. It suddenly makes sense to get these 4-5 swarmhosts out early even against bio/mine, because their price has been reduced alot and they help to tank damage and activate mines. On the other hand it would limit swarmhost production against mech and protoss effectively. It would work like intended. Exact numbers of course would have to be figured out (limits, prices etc.)

But I know, haters gonna hate and you are such. Ugly is to watch 15-25 swarmhost full commitment games that endure 50 minutes. Good is to make swarmhosts viable in low numbers while not allowing them to get too many. This is what my proposal could manage to do, when balanced out right.

On August 29 2013 21:34 LSN wrote:
medivac boost is a good thing, if terrans didnt have it they couldn't drop at all anymore without going for a 100% suicide mission in many situations. More of a problem is that what is inside the medivacs can be so strong in terms of dps.

The only solution I see is to make players use different combinations of units than they do now. What if zergs get infestation pit after mutalisks are out and they can add cheaply as many swarm hosts as they have queens? When terrans set up a bio/mine+potential tank siege position in front of a zerg expansion the hosts can help to break it while muta/ling/bane can keep caring on drops or runbies.

When fighting back a terran army Z could even set up an own siege position against a terran expansion and defend this position with banelings and stuff. Then if T cant crush this siege instantly he would need a few tanks to deal with locusts, which they do best without taking damage if host number is not high. Limiting swarm hosts to the number of queens would not allow the Z to go hosts only, just use them as an addition to his actualy army what they imo should be.

On August 29 2013 21:26 Sissors wrote:

Always easy, you propose a horrible idea, and then everyone who isn't in favor of it is a 'hater'.

You can also nerf 4M by adding a max of 10 widow mines. And your army may not consist of more than 25% marines. Aditionally max two medivacs per OC. Yeah it kills 4M, but even if you want that, it is still a bad idea.

It also won't help anyway. Zergs are not going to get an early infestation pit so they can make a few cheaper swarmhosts, which then slow down their entire army and requires alot of babysitting.

On August 29 2013 21:36 lolfail9001 wrote:

without SERIOUS changes to SH, few more mutas is always better than 7 (5 queens at hatches + 2 creep spreading ones queens) SHs. Symbol showed quite well, that if you win engagement against T and you have mass mutas, you may end up winning game there.

On August 29 2013 21:40 LSN wrote:


Swarmhosts couldnt be more horrible than they are now, this alone is a reason to change anything, almost no matter what. They are basically a useless unit. This also isnt a fixed limit. A zerg could add a few queens to increase swarmhost numbers from 5 to 8 if he feels like. I doubt it would make sende to go for 15 queens just to get 15 swarmhosts and then be completely immobile.

In fact you have zero arguments again. Probably it is just that you cant deal with a proposal that would be a buff for a mostly unused Z unit. This is not connected to mines or OCs, its a proposal for swarmhosts that is actually quite good to bring them back into the game without creating that strong up/op situations when using them. When you now build 5 hosts they are completely up, when you build 20 of them vs the right unit mix of an opponent they are way op.





It is just a matter of costs/chances. Of course ultralisks are better but they also are more far away. Need hive, ultralisk upgrade and the price of ultralisks is also quite high. Hosts should not replace ultralisks with this proposal. They should be an optional part of the transition. Of course swarmhosts hp/damage and attack speed can be adjusted to such a change as well as the price so that they become a viable option in midgame without being up/op. I dont know why you guys are so much limited in thinking.

On August 29 2013 21:40 LSN wrote:


Swarmhosts couldnt be more horrible than they are now, this alone is a reason to change anything, almost no matter what. They are basically a useless unit. This also isnt a fixed limit. A zerg could add a few queens to increase swarmhost numbers from 5 to 8 if he feels like. I doubt it would make sende to go for 15 queens just to get 15 swarmhosts and then be completely immobile.

In fact you have zero arguments again. Probably it is just that you cant deal with a proposal that would be a buff for a mostly unused Z unit. This is not connected to mines or OCs, its a proposal for swarmhosts that is actually quite good to bring them back into the game without creating that strong up/op situations when using them. When you now build 5 hosts they are completely up, when you build 20 of them vs the right unit mix of an opponent they are way op.





It is just a matter of costs/chances. Of course ultralisks are better but they also are more far away. Need hive, ultralisk upgrade and the price of ultralisks is also quite high. Hosts should not replace ultralisks with this proposal. They should be an optional part of the transition. Of course swarmhosts hp/damage and attack speed can be adjusted to such a change as well as the price so that they become a viable option in midgame without being up/op. I dont know why you guys are so much limited in thinking.