EPTDevelopers Update : Heart of the Swarm - Page 90
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10940 Posts
On April 20 2012 20:46 Destroyr wrote: The roach is a stupid unit... it has such low costs... and is so massable for a fact if you go vs toss on two base and you are on three and he hasnt killed you before 10-11 minutes... how will he win when your 200/200 roach army apprears... On the other hand zvz is so much fun. So fast games and you can micro vs your opponent... but if i play a muta centric style and he goes 3rd base... and just a moves roaches... its pretty sad that your opponent doesnt have to invest any micro (except hitting some fungals or dropping some infested Ts) to kill you when you are apming the shit out of the game... its really just sad. Roach is a stupid unit. I think back in Beta Blizzard was to afraid to REALLY tweak the Roach and instead wasted to much time fiddling with it's supply/armor... Which made it bad until they gave it more range.. Which made it as friggin strong as it is now. They should have tweaked it's HP, Damage and Size and leave it at 1 supply... Oh.. Let's put in SC/BW Hydras.. That would have been better anyway... | ||
|
KULA_u
Switzerland107 Posts
On April 20 2012 21:19 Velr wrote: I think back in Beta Blizzard was to afraid to REALLY tweak the Roach and instead wasted to much time fiddling with it's supply/armor... Which made it bad until they gave it more range.. Which made it as friggin strong as it is now. They should have tweaked it's HP, Damage and Size and leave it at 1 supply... Oh.. Let's put in SC/BW Hydras.. That would have been better anyway... indeed. just like with the marauder, it was so terribly obvious that the roach was badly designed since the beginning of the beta. the roach should have been made closed to it's basic design idea: a unit that has a high regeneration rate. If this were the focus of the unit it would have been a much more interesting unit along the line of 50-75minerals, 25gas, 50-70HP, regen of ~2 HP/s (no bonus regen when burrowed), 1 supply, 0 armor, no armor type except biological, smaller size, burrow tier 1 tech, very slow tunneling possible as soon as burrow is researched, tunneling speed upgrade tier 2 tech (possibly also increasing normal movement speed), and maybe some kind of tier 3 upgrade like increased regeneration, resistance to spells (e.g. spells only do half of their effect) or something like that. I don't know what weapon it should have, as it shouldn't be to cloase to the sc/bw hydra, but I think a range of 2-3 with lower damage per shot or even melee with some damage over time would have been interesting. (something in that line of course, not exactly like this) but instead they made a cheap and boring unit that takes the tank role away from the ultralisk and completetly changed zerg design, by relegating the hydra to a slowmoving glass cannon and the ultra to an antio armored AoE finisher. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On April 20 2012 21:45 KULA_u wrote: indeed. just like with the marauder, it was so terribly obvious that the roach was badly designed since the beginning of the beta. the roach should have been made closed to it's basic design idea: a unit that has a high regeneration rate. If this were the focus of the unit it would have been a much more interesting unit along the line of 50-75minerals, 25gas, 50-70HP, regen of ~2 HP/s (no bonus regen when burrowed), 1 supply, 0 armor, no armor type except biological, smaller size, burrow tier 1 tech, very slow tunneling possible as soon as burrow is researched, tunneling speed upgrade tier 2 tech (possibly also increasing normal movement speed), and maybe some kind of tier 3 upgrade like increased regeneration, resistance to spells (e.g. spells only do half of their effect) or something like that. I don't know what weapon it should have, as it shouldn't be to cloase to the sc/bw hydra, but I think a range of 2-3 with lower damage per shot or even melee with some damage over time would have been interesting. (something in that line of course, not exactly like this) but instead they made a cheap and boring unit that takes the tank role away from the ultralisk and completetly changed zerg design, by relegating the hydra to a slowmoving glass cannon and the ultra to an antio armored AoE finisher. your design is all the reasons why they scrapped it. 2hp/s doesn't matter when 40 stalkers are shooting you. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
Truth is, they will be patching HotS and WoL separately so we're going to end up with different stats on some of the same units anyway. I think a drastic, obvious change from the beginning is far less confusing than that. | ||
|
Haustka
United States221 Posts
So Protoss cant just A move into Zerg's or Terran's 200 units with mothership and gg sorry Protoss, but our current meta game is like that at the moment. | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
That's why I don't think it's good PR for Dustin Browder to publicly state a unit like the Oracle is a replacement for the Mothership. The connection isn't too obvious between those two, so why draw attention to it? (unlike say Thor versus Warhound, where it's obvious) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 21 2012 00:02 Haustka wrote: blizzard, can u make the game so that when its equal economy and equal 200 units vs 200 units(same value and same ratio of units composition), can you make it a positional war? So Protoss cant just A move into Zerg's or Terran's 200 units with mothership and gg sorry Protoss, but our current meta game is like that at the moment. They removed the mothership before you even asked. Problems solved. | ||
|
Resistentialism
Canada688 Posts
On April 21 2012 00:02 Haustka wrote: blizzard, can u make the game so that when its equal economy and equal 200 units vs 200 units(same value and same ratio of units composition), can you make it a positional war? So Protoss cant just A move into Zerg's or Terran's 200 units with mothership and gg sorry Protoss, but our current meta game is like that at the moment. Zerg hits 200 food 11 minutes into the game and has an economy advantage almost from 00:00. They also get to their 'ideal composition' far earlier. For what you want they basically need to have three of the exact same race. | ||
|
zTz
United States476 Posts
| ||
|
Trok67
France384 Posts
-banelings : they combine both AOE damage + bonus against light which makes them DEADLY against 2 units (marine and zerglings) and completely useless against any other unit in the game. I kinda feel that such a "niche" unit is not really good, it is really too good against zerglings and marine and too bad against other units - corruptor : very meh units, not really fun to play, doesn't have any fun ability or gameplay mechanic + his bonus against massive units make carrier and battlecruisers completely worthless because they are so easily countered -broodlord : the broodlings mechanic is just so annoying to play against, you just can't kill well microed and supported broodlords with ground units (your unit will just mess up with the broodlings) even if those units are supposed to be good against air units - carrier/battlecruiser : didn't find their role in the game | ||
|
snakeeyez
United States1231 Posts
On April 19 2012 23:53 bhfberserk wrote: I hope blizz really over haul the entire SC2. From DPS, strats, everything. so that there is more micro play. instead of deathball strategy. Pretty obvious from what they have done so far that this is not going to happen. Add some new units with cool stuff and see how it plays out then tweak minor stats from there. I think brood war turning out how it did was just a fluke too bad the better game is kind of figured out and dying out at this point. | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On April 21 2012 05:38 Trok67 wrote: units I would like the "gameplay" to be modified : -banelings : they combine both AOE damage + bonus against light which makes them DEADLY against 2 units (marine and zerglings) and completely useless against any other unit in the game. I kinda feel that such a "niche" unit is not really good, it is really too good against zerglings and marine and too bad against other units - corruptor : very meh units, not really fun to play, doesn't have any fun ability or gameplay mechanic + his bonus against massive units make carrier and battlecruisers completely worthless because they are so easily countered -broodlord : the broodlings mechanic is just so annoying to play against, you just can't kill well microed and supported broodlords with ground units (your unit will just mess up with the broodlings) even if those units are supposed to be good against air units - carrier/battlecruiser : didn't find their role in the game cruisers have their place, endgame tvt AtS unit that don't succumb to marine fire. | ||
|
hoivenmayven
United States134 Posts
On April 21 2012 05:41 snakeeyez wrote: Pretty obvious from what they have done so far that this is not going to happen. Add some new units with cool stuff and see how it plays out then tweak minor stats from there. I think brood war turning out how it did was just a fluke too bad the better game is kind of figured out and dying out at this point. This. It doesn't seem like blizz even realizes what they did right with BW. Now just obsessed with what toys Browder thinks would be cool to play with and making sure every unit in the game someday becomes a niche unit. | ||
|
serge
Russian Federation142 Posts
On April 21 2012 05:41 snakeeyez wrote: Pretty obvious from what they have done so far that this is not going to happen. Add some new units with cool stuff and see how it plays out then tweak minor stats from there. I think brood war turning out how it did was just a fluke too bad the better game is kind of figured out and dying out at this point. It's really sad too. I think WoL had real potential if they just decided to say screw it and scrapped half of their ideas when they saw them half-fail. But I guess money interests are too much nowadays. | ||
|
obsid
United States389 Posts
On April 21 2012 05:38 Trok67 wrote: units I would like the "gameplay" to be modified : -banelings : they combine both AOE damage + bonus against light which makes them DEADLY against 2 units (marine and zerglings) and completely useless against any other unit in the game. I kinda feel that such a "niche" unit is not really good, it is really too good against zerglings and marine and too bad against other units I somewhat agree, but banelings also are good against protoss and thor death balls, and are the ONLY way to really kill marines in ZvT other then infesters (and all of that fails against a good spread). Maybe marine has to be changed slightly in addition to this then. - corruptor : very meh units, not really fun to play, doesn't have any fun ability or gameplay mechanic + his bonus against massive units make carrier and battlecruisers completely worthless because they are so easily countered - carrier/battlecruiser : didn't find their role in the game Somewhat agree with this, but again there has to be SOME way to counter these units colsi/carrier/bc's. Without corrupter they would be way too good currently, especially with splash damage like the colsi has. You get enough colsi and stalkers and nothing can stop them, and thats with corrupters! -broodlord : the broodlings mechanic is just so annoying to play against, you just can't kill well microed and supported broodlords with ground units (your unit will just mess up with the broodlings) even if those units are supposed to be good against air units I dont know what kind of game your playing but marines and stalkers can rip broodlords up really fast if your not careful. And air units also clearly work. | ||
|
Don.681
Philippines189 Posts
On April 21 2012 00:01 Gfire wrote: I hope they aren't too stubborn to make drastic changes to existing units like roaches even if they are not problematic in the current version. I could see them saying that unnecessary changes will just confuse the players too much. That was what they said when they refused to use the newer version of Korhal Compound in ladder, because it's winrates were balanced. Truth is, they will be patching HotS and WoL separately so we're going to end up with different stats on some of the same units anyway. I think a drastic, obvious change from the beginning is far less confusing than that. If they really wanted to do this, its easy --tweak the stats to to what they are really aiming for. Then, if it's too different --change the model/skin/name. No more confusion. | ||
|
entrust
Poland196 Posts
From another thread, but whatever. | ||
|
convention
United States622 Posts
On April 21 2012 00:02 Haustka wrote: blizzard, can u make the game so that when its equal economy and equal 200 units vs 200 units(same value and same ratio of units composition), can you make it a positional war? So Protoss cant just A move into Zerg's or Terran's 200 units with mothership and gg sorry Protoss, but our current meta game is like that at the moment. Even if both armies are the same cost, if one is twice as mobile than the other, then for balance to exist it has to be weaker. And if one army can be remade much faster, it also has to be weaker. So zerg's deathball has to be weaker than the toss deathball, and the terran deathball has to be weaker than the protoss deathball. Otherwise protoss would always be less than a 50% W/L ratio since its army builds slower and is less mobile. | ||
| ||
