|
United States15275 Posts
On August 29 2013 22:20 Decendos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 21:40 LSN wrote: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. 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. On August 29 2013 21:36 lolfail9001 wrote: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.
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. 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. just giving SHs +bio dmg would make them a lot better. same for hydras. just give both some small amount of +dmg to bio. maybe just +1 bio dmg but let them gain +2 per uprade vs bio so lategame SHs and roach hydra would become viable vs bio and wont affect mech or toss at all (you dont fight locusts with zealots anyway).
Roach/hydra is a very boring goal to reach for. I would actually prefer ling/bane/hydra as the ultimate mobile composition.
On August 29 2013 21:40 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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. Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 21:36 lolfail9001 wrote: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.
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. 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.
Putting an artificial limitation on how many of a certain unit can be made is admitting that the unit itself is poorly designed.
|
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play.
|
United States15275 Posts
On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play.
That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place.
|
On August 29 2013 19:11 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 19:10 VieuxSinge wrote:On August 29 2013 19:07 hansonslee wrote:
Let's hope that Overseer buff would help, which I highly doubt :/ Just watch the VOD of flash's stream : http://www.twitch.tv/ktrolsterflash/b/453050408There are some awesome macro games TvZ (especially in the second half of the vod) but 4 times out of 5 he loses the macro game against some IIIIIIIIIIII zergs. Sadly we can not know who they are  These were some sloppy games by Flash. I think he is kinda disinterested. I saw he was playing weird marauder/helbat push. And in one game zerg didn't have mutalisks at all, and Flash didn't do a single drop.
I wouldn't look into these too much. Flash probably wouldn't use his best stuff when streaming.
|
On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place.
But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire.
|
United States15275 Posts
On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire.
Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast.
|
On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast.
You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc
|
United States15275 Posts
On August 29 2013 23:26 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast. You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc
You shouldn't have played SC2 in the first place. ;]
|
On August 29 2013 23:32 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 23:26 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast. You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc You shouldn't have played SC2 in the first place. ;]
Or generally any RTS games. There is basically no RTS game out there that has units that are really interesting in themselves. It's the unit relations that make units interesting.
E.g. a Siege Tank in itself is not really an interesting unit. It can move, attack and siege. If my basic units have bigger range than the Siege Tank the relations simply won't make tankplay interesting.
Or marine micro is only possible for as long as the marine has high speed and superior range to his enemies. The moment you fight marines against other singlefire units with similar speed and range it becomes nothing but an amove battle.
etc.
|
On August 29 2013 20:18 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 20:07 NarutO wrote:On August 29 2013 20:05 lolfail9001 wrote:On August 29 2013 20:00 NarutO wrote:
I have a brilliant idea :D why not give the overseer ability a use and let it deactive mines ? :D No trolling here, maybe that would be cool/work? :x Ofcourse needs to be balanced that not all mines can be deactivated and leave Terran naked. contaminate costing 100 energy that is useful on units? +1! 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. Only on 30 seconds! As in stops mine from working (and stops cooling down too!) at all for those 30 seconds.
Easy fix. The changeling's mimic ability is deactivatable auto-cast. This allows it to be a anti mine deactivation function.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On August 30 2013 00:42 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 20:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On August 29 2013 20:07 NarutO wrote:On August 29 2013 20:05 lolfail9001 wrote:On August 29 2013 20:00 NarutO wrote:
I have a brilliant idea :D why not give the overseer ability a use and let it deactive mines ? :D No trolling here, maybe that would be cool/work? :x Ofcourse needs to be balanced that not all mines can be deactivated and leave Terran naked. contaminate costing 100 energy that is useful on units? +1! 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. Only on 30 seconds! As in stops mine from working (and stops cooling down too!) at all for those 30 seconds. Easy fix. The changeling's mimic ability is deactivatable auto-cast. This allows it to be a anti mine deactivation function.
I imagine how bad ass it would be in lower league games to blow up terran's army by deactivating mimic (since changelings will keep their 0 priority :D).
|
United States15275 Posts
That would work in the case where the terran has no awareness whatsoever, but I like the idea against the static widow mine fields that are left over after the terran army dies.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On August 30 2013 01:01 CosmicSpiral wrote:
That would work in the case where the terran has no awareness whatsoever.
Hence the lower leagues 
|
On August 30 2013 00:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 23:32 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 23:26 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast. You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc You shouldn't have played SC2 in the first place. ;] Or generally any RTS games. There is basically no RTS game out there that has units that are really interesting in themselves. It's the unit relations that make units interesting. E.g. a Siege Tank in itself is not really an interesting unit. It can move, attack and siege. If my basic units have bigger range than the Siege Tank the relations simply won't make tankplay interesting. Or marine micro is only possible for as long as the marine has high speed and superior range to his enemies. The moment you fight marines against other singlefire units with similar speed and range it becomes nothing but an amove battle. etc.
Broodwar Ghost, Broodwar Queen, Broodwar Defiler, Science Vessel
all interesting
|
On August 30 2013 01:48 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 00:11 Big J wrote:On August 29 2013 23:32 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 23:26 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast. You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc You shouldn't have played SC2 in the first place. ;] Or generally any RTS games. There is basically no RTS game out there that has units that are really interesting in themselves. It's the unit relations that make units interesting. E.g. a Siege Tank in itself is not really an interesting unit. It can move, attack and siege. If my basic units have bigger range than the Siege Tank the relations simply won't make tankplay interesting. Or marine micro is only possible for as long as the marine has high speed and superior range to his enemies. The moment you fight marines against other singlefire units with similar speed and range it becomes nothing but an amove battle. etc. Broodwar Ghost, Broodwar Queen, Broodwar Defiler, Science Vessel all interesting
yeah, that's true. Spellcasters have a quite easier time being inherently interesting. Though again, Ghost and Queen weren't used that much due to lacking useful interactions against a lot of units/compositions.
|
On August 29 2013 22:29 CosmicSpiral wrote:
Putting an artificial limitation on how many of a certain unit can be made is admitting that the unit itself is poorly designed.
If you got an overlord you can build 8 zerglings. If you got 2 you can build 16.
If you got 1 queen you can build 1 swarm host. If you got 2 you can build 2.
You again provide limiting thinking patterns.
All units are eventually artificially limited at a certain point of time in the game by the number of ressources they cost and the units of time they need to be produced. So after 3 minutes in a game, a zerg can't produce 7 ultralisks. Neither can a terran have 3 tanks or 1 battle cruiser.
The MSC has a fixed limit of 1. Zerglings have a limit of 16 per overlord and 16 per 400 minerals you gathered. The production capabilities of banelings are limited by the numbers of zerglings you have, the number of broodlords you can build is limited by the number of corruptors you have.
It is all the same and for sure not a matter of poor balance. These are just different unit design approaches. In my approach e.g. queens would evolve into a limiting resource for swarmhosts, this is nothing about poor design, not at all.
Just to repeat:
Noone needs/wants SH to be a full commitment unit that you either build none of at all or at least 15+. SH should be units that can be more easily combined with other units and be a support for them. That would increase quality of this units design and allow a bigger variety of strategies that can use a combination of swarmhosts in the unit-mix.
|
As mentioned before please do open a designated design topic if you want to discuss design. I will not speak for everyone but its tiresome. Its about balance here and while design overall makes for balance, the design we have right now is given and overall won't be changed. I even dare to say some of your points can be valid, but most of it is wrong or in the wrong place. Most of the time you don't consider your changes to every match up and especially you cannot discuss balance and approach a gamechange in design.
We do all 'GET' your points, we simply disagree because lots of them are dumb. We are not haters nor do we not think, we simply do not agree. Once again, PLEASE if you have suggestions for units that increase balance/help in critical situations word them correctly. Do point out what the goal of the change is, what the change will do to other match ups but don't come up with artificial ways to change the game. One swarmhost per queen or two fusion cores for 3-3 Terran upgrades. Please you cannot be serious.
Also in addition: Please do never go into the mental aspect of progaming again... you clearly are not edjucated in that field and everything you wrote down is pure guessing on your part.
|
On August 30 2013 02:01 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2013 01:48 NarutO wrote:On August 30 2013 00:11 Big J wrote:On August 29 2013 23:32 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 23:26 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 23:11 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:56 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2013 22:45 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 29 2013 22:32 bo1b wrote:
I really don't know why they don't buff the shit out of the damage that locusts do, make it so locusts can't be up permanently, lower the health of locusts, make swarm hosts faster, and then put a leash range on locusts so they can't attack from so far away if theirs creep available.
Would make the unit so much more interesting to watch and play. That wasn't the original purpose of the unit. It was meant to be a way for zerg players to break a terran that was entrenched without waiting for hive tech or sacrificing their entire army. But now there's no reason for terrans to stay behind a wall of bunkers and siege tanks in the first place. But making those changes wouldn't remove that possibility, it would just take more skill, be more interesting to play, be more interesting to watch, and would allow people to play against the cooldown that the swarmhosts would have. Sort of like how zergs send in a zergling to bait siege tank fire. Locusts already have high DPS. They do twice as much base DPS as a marine. Locust health doesn't really play into the unit being too strong as a siege unit unless you mean lategame ZvZ. Everything else would be nice but compensating for troublesome design in the first place. And we haven't even talked about how poor SH synergy is with the basic zerg cast. You're probably right, I think I'm just clutching at straws in hope of a change towards more interesting units, and less a-movy units/boring units like the collosus/voidray/tempest/swarmhost/marauder/roach/hellbat etc You shouldn't have played SC2 in the first place. ;] Or generally any RTS games. There is basically no RTS game out there that has units that are really interesting in themselves. It's the unit relations that make units interesting. E.g. a Siege Tank in itself is not really an interesting unit. It can move, attack and siege. If my basic units have bigger range than the Siege Tank the relations simply won't make tankplay interesting. Or marine micro is only possible for as long as the marine has high speed and superior range to his enemies. The moment you fight marines against other singlefire units with similar speed and range it becomes nothing but an amove battle. etc. Broodwar Ghost, Broodwar Queen, Broodwar Defiler, Science Vessel all interesting yeah, that's true. Spellcasters have a quite easier time being inherently interesting. Though again, Ghost and Queen weren't used that much due to lacking useful interactions against a lot of units/compositions.
Spellcasters in SC2 have become less interesting due to the fact that they are a "mass unit". There was no smartcast in BW and thus you didnt have "blanket storms" across whole armies; each storm actually meant something AND took a bit of effort/skill on the part of the user, because you had to select one unit and use it.
I would also add any units that required skill to use to the exciting ones and Reaver drops and 2-group Mutalisk could belong in that group.
Another exciting/entertaining group of units is completely missing from SC2 and those are the "comical relief" ones: Spider Mines and Reaver shot .... which were both capable of "aaaahhhh" and "awwwwww" moments. "Imperfect" unit pathing made these two units / abilities rather unpredictable and thus exciting as a lottery.
|
There was 'smart storms' in broodwar. It was just way harder to use.
|
On August 30 2013 02:10 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2013 22:29 CosmicSpiral wrote:
Putting an artificial limitation on how many of a certain unit can be made is admitting that the unit itself is poorly designed. If you got an overlord you can build 8 zerglings. If you got 2 you can build 16. If you got 1 queen you can build 1 swarm host. If you got 2 you can build 2.
Queens don't provide any supply. Also 1 Overlord = 16 Zerglings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
