|
On January 30 2014 07:28 Zhadez10 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 06:55 Hider wrote:
@ Scourges
I think Kabel is about to do something pretty interesting with them: Increase their probability to overkill / dumb-down the AI.
Right now, while they do overkill, they are still somewhat intelligent, so if you tell 10 scourges to a-move vs 5 Corsairs, and you try to micro away one of the Corsairs, then only around 4 of the Scourges will continue following the Corsair and eventually overkill it if it if they catch up to the Corsair.
However, by further dumbing down the AI of Scourges, then all 10 of them will continue to follow the Corsair and overkill it if a-moved. Or alternatively, the protoss player can micro the Corsair around in circles while the other Corsairs will kill the Scourges. That should make micro possible for both sides as the zerg player will have to micro each individual Scourge rather than tell all of them to a-move.
Thoughts on that? Personally I dont really like changes that are in the direction of making the AI dumber. In your example I find it very reasonable that 4 of them follow the corsair (so is it always double the required scourges that follow? or perhaps scourges needed+2? or was that just a random number perhaps?). Anyhow if scourges are proving to be too strong I'd rather want the splash damage reduced as an example. Or perhaps health reduced. Personally I think it's really cool that scourges have splash damage in Starbow.
Yeah, I agree with this.
I would rather see the HP nerf than removing splash or making AI dumber.
|
Personally I find Grumbel's idea very interesting: scourge with high speed (higher than Mutalisk) but low turn rate.
This way Mutas in ZvZ can destroy naked scourges no problem by circling around them, but against scourges supported by Mutas, retreating Mutas would either fall to scourges or take some shots from ennemy Mutas.
This could be a fun interaction, and maybe make Muta wars less dominant in the matchup, since you cannot always retreat safely...
|
On January 30 2014 07:40 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 07:28 Zhadez10 wrote:On January 30 2014 06:55 Hider wrote:
@ Scourges
I think Kabel is about to do something pretty interesting with them: Increase their probability to overkill / dumb-down the AI.
Right now, while they do overkill, they are still somewhat intelligent, so if you tell 10 scourges to a-move vs 5 Corsairs, and you try to micro away one of the Corsairs, then only around 4 of the Scourges will continue following the Corsair and eventually overkill it if it if they catch up to the Corsair.
However, by further dumbing down the AI of Scourges, then all 10 of them will continue to follow the Corsair and overkill it if a-moved. Or alternatively, the protoss player can micro the Corsair around in circles while the other Corsairs will kill the Scourges. That should make micro possible for both sides as the zerg player will have to micro each individual Scourge rather than tell all of them to a-move.
Thoughts on that? Personally I dont really like changes that are in the direction of making the AI dumber. In your example I find it very reasonable that 4 of them follow the corsair (so is it always double the required scourges that follow? or perhaps scourges needed+2? or was that just a random number perhaps?). Anyhow if scourges are proving to be too strong I'd rather want the splash damage reduced as an example. Or perhaps health reduced. Personally I think it's really cool that scourges have splash damage in Starbow. Yeah, I agree with this. I would rather see the HP nerf than removing splash or making AI dumber.
By reducing HP we end up with a situation where a critical mass of +1 a-moved Corairs (6-7) wins against Scourges without any real countermicro opportunity. Generally, I am not for increasing the skill cap in artifical ways (aka no MBS, dumbing down the AI), but I think in this case it could add a lot of really fun micro for both players.
Personally I find Grumbel's idea very interesting: scourge with high speed (higher than Mutalisk) but low turn rate.
This way Mutas in ZvZ can destroy naked scourges no problem by circling around them, but against scourges supported by Mutas, retreating Mutas would either fall to scourges or take some shots from ennemy Mutas.
This could be a fun interaction, and maybe make Muta wars less dominant in the matchup, since you cannot always retreat safely...
Yeh I think this is also an idea that is worth discussing/testing.
EDIT: Apparently it was tested previously, and it was super annoying to play with so it was removed.
|
It reaaaally depends on the values you pick. I tried some values of my own and it didn't work out too well, but maybe others have more success? Scourge need to be fast with low acceleration and low turn speed while mutalisk and corsairs need high maneuverability, but lower maximum speed. I think if you make the scourge too slow it doesn't work.
|
On January 30 2014 08:09 Grumbels wrote:
It reaaaally depends on the values you pick. I tried some values of my own and it didn't work out too well, but maybe others have more success? Scourge need to be fast with low acceleration and low turn speed while mutalisk and corsairs need high maneuverability, but lower maximum speed. I think if you make the scourge too slow it doesn't work.
Ye probably. Would you mind uploading a video if you manage to get some values that looks great?
|
Ramiz has a point. Since Starbow has also infinite selection,also Protoss requires a lot of reaver/prism / storm micro in battles to be able to fight vs a- move armies.
|
On January 30 2014 08:04 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 07:40 Ramiz1989 wrote:On January 30 2014 07:28 Zhadez10 wrote:On January 30 2014 06:55 Hider wrote:
@ Scourges
I think Kabel is about to do something pretty interesting with them: Increase their probability to overkill / dumb-down the AI.
Right now, while they do overkill, they are still somewhat intelligent, so if you tell 10 scourges to a-move vs 5 Corsairs, and you try to micro away one of the Corsairs, then only around 4 of the Scourges will continue following the Corsair and eventually overkill it if it if they catch up to the Corsair.
However, by further dumbing down the AI of Scourges, then all 10 of them will continue to follow the Corsair and overkill it if a-moved. Or alternatively, the protoss player can micro the Corsair around in circles while the other Corsairs will kill the Scourges. That should make micro possible for both sides as the zerg player will have to micro each individual Scourge rather than tell all of them to a-move.
Thoughts on that? Personally I dont really like changes that are in the direction of making the AI dumber. In your example I find it very reasonable that 4 of them follow the corsair (so is it always double the required scourges that follow? or perhaps scourges needed+2? or was that just a random number perhaps?). Anyhow if scourges are proving to be too strong I'd rather want the splash damage reduced as an example. Or perhaps health reduced. Personally I think it's really cool that scourges have splash damage in Starbow. Yeah, I agree with this. I would rather see the HP nerf than removing splash or making AI dumber. By reducing HP we end up with a situation where a critical mass of +1 a-moved Corairs (6-7) wins against Scourges without any real countermicro opportunity. Generally, I am not for increasing the skill cap in artifical ways (aka no MBS, dumbing down the AI), but I think in this case it could add a lot of really fun micro for both players.
Thats how it was in BW tho, +1 upgraded corsairs of 6+ would easily wipe out scourges. I'll disagree with you on where you say there is no real countermicro opportunity. You can bring mutalisks to tank some shots as you move in with the scourges, you come from different sides (so the splash doesnt hit all the scourges), you can make vipers and cast ensnare to reduce their attack speed by 30%, you can use devourers (late game obv if the toss sticks to mass corsairs) to slow the attack speed of the corsairs, you can research +1 air defense to counteract the +1 attack on the corsairs.
That idea with the fast max speed but low accel scourges and low turn rate does sound interesting. I guess one thing to keep in mind would be that this would make scourges more powerful vs the slow capital air ships.
|
Seems really hard to play safe vs zerg as toss right now, it looks very difficult for protoss to get good trade vs ling/roach/hydra armies. it may be that players haven't gotten used to using storm in conjunction with the quite difficult to use reaver.
Feels like the early game units from SC2 like banes and roaches are more beneficial for zerg than stalkers and sentinels are for protoss.
|
I love losing playing Starbow, and I say it without sarcasm. Keep the good work!
|
you can research +1 air defense to counteract the +1 attack on the corsairs.
That's, however a strategical decision. Not really micro.
you can make vipers and cast ensnare to reduce their attack speed by 30%,
Ensnare is too slow a projectile for this too be practical
You can bring mutalisks to tank some shots as you move in with the scourges
True, but I just don't see that as "real" micro. Feels similar to Mutalisk vs Mutalisk micro where you put lings under Mutalisks to absorb damage.
|
On January 30 2014 07:59 lithyeld wrote:
Personally I find Grumbel's idea very interesting: scourge with high speed (higher than Mutalisk) but low turn rate.
This way Mutas in ZvZ can destroy naked scourges no problem by circling around them, but against scourges supported by Mutas, retreating Mutas would either fall to scourges or take some shots from ennemy Mutas.
This could be a fun interaction, and maybe make Muta wars less dominant in the matchup, since you cannot always retreat safely...
I think this would be bad for ZvZ. You can already kill naked scourges no problem by patrolling just in front of your muta. Your muta will shoot without slowing down and you can kill infinite scourges if you don't make a mistake.
|
On January 30 2014 07:40 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 07:28 Zhadez10 wrote:On January 30 2014 06:55 Hider wrote:
@ Scourges
I think Kabel is about to do something pretty interesting with them: Increase their probability to overkill / dumb-down the AI.
Right now, while they do overkill, they are still somewhat intelligent, so if you tell 10 scourges to a-move vs 5 Corsairs, and you try to micro away one of the Corsairs, then only around 4 of the Scourges will continue following the Corsair and eventually overkill it if it if they catch up to the Corsair.
However, by further dumbing down the AI of Scourges, then all 10 of them will continue to follow the Corsair and overkill it if a-moved. Or alternatively, the protoss player can micro the Corsair around in circles while the other Corsairs will kill the Scourges. That should make micro possible for both sides as the zerg player will have to micro each individual Scourge rather than tell all of them to a-move.
Thoughts on that? Personally I dont really like changes that are in the direction of making the AI dumber. In your example I find it very reasonable that 4 of them follow the corsair (so is it always double the required scourges that follow? or perhaps scourges needed+2? or was that just a random number perhaps?). Anyhow if scourges are proving to be too strong I'd rather want the splash damage reduced as an example. Or perhaps health reduced. Personally I think it's really cool that scourges have splash damage in Starbow. Yeah, I agree with this. I would rather see the HP nerf than removing splash or making AI dumber.
People are already enjoying the game because of the "dumber AI", so saying that it makes the "AI dumber" is just a statement which only carries weight because there is a consensus amongst SC2 players that "smart AI" = better and "dumb AI" = worse.
I'd like see why you think this particular "feature" would actually make the game worse. The current AI right now is almost like having auto-splitting marines, I'd much rather that players had to split the scourge themselves to achieve maximum efficiency.
This feature is an example of what I like to call a "Differentiator". Differentiators are important because not only does it give more avenues for a better player to beat a weaker player, they allow players to take risks, there's a reason for SC2 3 base turtly deathball play, and this is one of them.
When a player can achieve much higher efficiency than normal, he is much more likely to be aggressive. We can take MKP' for instance.
If marines split automatically he wouldn't be playing a tempo game because the Zerg will be fighting under a pre-calculated metric which will always be the same, meaning the zerg will just sit in his base until he has the right composition and numbers that can overcome this cost-deficiency and just a-move his split marines to death.
If the marines have to be manually split both players are going to be more aggressive. This is because the differentiator allows players to be more opportunistic, and the calculation is dynamic. Zerg is going to try and kill the marines before they split, and Zerg not sitting in his base means that the Terran is going to try and kill the army while the opportunity is there.
This will be the same for scourge. When scourge are too smart, players will avoid each other because the outcome is obvious, when there is a differentiator, players will be more opportunistic and be willing to take the battle because both are confident in their micro abilities to overcome the other.
|
On January 30 2014 09:32 Hider wrote:Show nested quote + you can research +1 air defense to counteract the +1 attack on the corsairs. That's, however a strategical decision. Not really micro. Ensnare is too slow a projectile for this too be practical True, but I just don't see that as "real" micro. Feels similar to Mutalisk vs Mutalisk micro where you put lings under Mutalisks to absorb damage.
I wouldnt mind a buff to viper ensnare projectile speed tbh, it's like really slow and almost gimmicky. And if you're gonna mention smartcasting then I'll say smartcasting is not a big deal since you're never really gonna mass vipers for ensnare, not like you would say high templars or science vessels.
Oh and I forgot to mention that Starbow scourges actually have more hp than than they did in BW; 35 vs 25
"real" micro... xD it's more like attacking a group of medican marines with zerglings to distract for scourges to hit vessels but ok.
|
People are already enjoying the game because of the "dumber AI", so saying that it makes the "AI dumber" is just a statement which only carries weight because there is a consensus amongst SC2 players that "smart AI" = better and "dumb AI" = worse.
Yeh I agree. I actually also edited out the statement dumber AI, and just kept in overkill (because that's actually the same thing here). Overkill seems to be a "plus"-word here, and dumber AI ins't.
But what is the right amount of overkill? Currently overkill has a value of "0.01" for units, but if increased to "0.03" it will make 10 of the Scourges for the Corsair instead of just 4 of them. Why are people so certian that 0.01 is the right value of overkill (?)
So I think its important to not have any predetermined point of view regarding whether you want smarter AI or not, but simply look at this at a case-by-case basis?
If players were punished for a-moving Scourges against a protoss player that inidivudally microed a single Corsair away from the remaining of his Corsairs. And what if the zerg player was rewarded for cotnrolling seperate groups of Scourges to attack each indiviudal Corsair - wouldn't that be super awesome to watch (and play)?
|
United Kingdom1381 Posts
|
My opinion is that the AI needs to be dumb because the player is supposed to be the one that's smart, not the AI. I don't understand the concept of "smart AI" in a competitive strategy game.
|
On January 30 2014 11:02 Grumbels wrote:
My opinion is that the AI needs to be dumb because the player is supposed to be the one that's smart, not the AI. I don't understand the concept of "smart AI" in a competitive strategy game.
the AI being smart doesn't mean the player can be dumber. it means the player's intelligence can be used on more interesting things than making sure units aren't getting themselves killed for no reason
|
On January 30 2014 11:02 Grumbels wrote:
My opinion is that the AI needs to be dumb because the player is supposed to be the one that's smart, not the AI. I don't understand the concept of "smart AI" in a competitive strategy game.
So if I click a bunch of units to go right and half of them go left because the AI is dumb, it's me who should have been smarter? I think you are thinking of one or two scenarios when you say "dumb AI smart player", but remember that it is a broader term
|
On January 30 2014 10:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +People are already enjoying the game because of the "dumber AI", so saying that it makes the "AI dumber" is just a statement which only carries weight because there is a consensus amongst SC2 players that "smart AI" = better and "dumb AI" = worse. Yeh I agree. I actually also edited out the statement dumber AI, and just kept in overkill (because that's actually the same thing here). Overkill seems to be a "plus"-word here, and dumber AI ins't. But what is the right amount of overkill? Currently overkill has a value of "0.01" for units, but if increased to "0.03" it will make 10 of the Scourges for the Corsair instead of just 4 of them. Why are people so certian that 0.01 is the right value of overkill (?) So I think its important to not have any predetermined point of view regarding whether you want smarter AI or not, but simply look at this at a case-by-case basis? If players were punished for a-moving Scourges against a protoss player that inidivudally microed a single Corsair away from the remaining of his Corsairs. And what if the zerg player was rewarded for cotnrolling seperate groups of Scourges to attack each indiviudal Corsair - wouldn't that be super awesome to watch (and play)?
Sorry for quoting you so much, and I'm not just trying to disagree with you but...
I dont think overkill is a big part of why ppl like Starbow, but the new units and how the economy works (rewarding you for having more bases).
Like I said before I think 4 scourge is very reasonable to go after a single corsair, but if it changes to 10 that instantly becomes rediculous.
What if he spreads out his corsairs (cloning is really hard btw and requires time and distance to set up OR you need to commit a bunch of hotkeys which is only feasable with low numbers of targets).
Another scenario could be if a group of mutas was being chased by a group of scourge (and scourge could actually catch up). There is no way you could effectively clone your scourge vs a muta clump and all the muta player has to do is press the spread button and BAM tons of scourge go to waste.
So yeah definitely look at this at a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
