EPTHaha. Awesome video. I would love a unit that shoots banelings, but I can see it being too imba :D
But if it is implemented let it have tank range, be zerg sieging unit. It could be tier 3 and replace Guardians :D
Starbow - Page 248
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
Haha. Awesome video. I would love a unit that shoots banelings, but I can see it being too imba :D But if it is implemented let it have tank range, be zerg sieging unit. It could be tier 3 and replace Guardians :D | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation618 Posts
On March 04 2014 20:50 RagequitBM wrote: Wish more people played. "2 people searching" is not very inviting. Thats because people mostly play with "Wide" search range, so they are connecting immediately to each other. Thats why there isn't many people searching at one moment of a time. In prime-time games are found very fast. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
On March 04 2014 09:47 Hider wrote: I don't think that's the case actually. The zerg player will try to take a quicker 3rd against a terran player when he goes banelings. How does the terran response? By teching and benefiting from AOE units? No, instead he goes Firebat heavy which do really well in low/mid sized numbers, and thus the terran player seeks the constant army trading since he doesn't scale particularly well and he has a way of putting pressure on the zerg (since there is no spine wall) and is thus incentivied to be aggressive (to force the zerg to invest into army units instead of drones). If you trade with a zerg going ling bane with 3 base 5 hatchery you will always end up behind. Even on a large amount of firebats. If you lose one army, you lose momentum, zerg can make a round of drones because you have to remake medics and then you are on 2 base economy, with a very small army, vs a zerg on 3 base with 4 close to 5 hatchery production. They are then free to tech or build anything and Terran has no real options. You can maybe trade with bad zergs who don't have solid enough timings or macro, but if you try and trade with someone who knows the mass drone into 6:30 ling, 7:30 10 drones, 8:00 mass ling timing you will end up behind. Replays to the contrary would be interesting. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On March 04 2014 22:04 Piy wrote: If you trade with a zerg going ling bane with 3 base 5 hatchery you will always end up behind. Even on a large amount of firebats. If you lose one army, you lose momentum, zerg can make a round of drones because you have to remake medics and then you are on 2 base economy, with a very small army, vs a zerg on 3 base with 4 close to 5 hatchery production. They are then free to tech or build anything and Terran has no real options. You can maybe trade with bad zergs who don't have solid enough timings or macro, but if you try and trade with someone who knows the mass drone into 6:30 ling, 7:30 10 drones, 8:00 mass ling timing you will end up behind. Replays to the contrary would be interesting. Yeh, sure. I guess Dirty can upload his replays. But the logic (against your post) goes something like this; - It doens't matter how many Hatcehries the zerg have if the terran has a much higher worker count. By constant trading you can keep his worker count down below yours. - Whether a race will turtle/defend or opt for army-trades depends on how well he scales. Siege Tanks scale well, so if players opted for that counter against Banelings, the meta (onec figured out) would be very timing-based (aka WOL late 2012) with little action occuring. But Firebats/Marine/Medic simply doesn't work like that. It fares better in medium sized armies IMO. - If you don't attack, they are free to tech to w/e choice they like. Yes, and that's exactly why you don't wanna let them masss up drones while teching. Simply put, terran is incentivied to get ahead before Zerg hive tech. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
On March 04 2014 22:40 Hider wrote: Yeh, sure. I guess Dirty can upload his replays. But the logic (against your post) goes something like this; - It doens't matter how many Hatcehries the zerg have if the terran has a much higher worker count. By constant trading you can keep his worker count down below yours. - Whether a race will turtle/defend or opt for army-trades depends on how well he scales. Siege Tanks scale well, so if players opted for that counter against Banelings, the meta (onec figured out) would be very timing-based (aka WOL late 2012) with little action occuring. But Firebats/Marine/Medic simply doesn't work like that. It fares better in medium sized armies IMO. - If you don't attack, they are free to tech to w/e choice they like. Yes, and that's exactly why you don't wanna let them masss up drones while teching. Simply put, terran is incentivied to get ahead before Zerg hive tech. Terran won't have a much higher worker count though. Because zerg plays with one gas, they get 3 bases with 10 drones at each quite quickly, which is more than Terran can possibly mine from only a 2 base economy. Even if you pressure, I've yet to see a timing, even post firebat buff, that can deal any damage to a zerg who makes the 20-30 lings at 6:30, into a few banelings transition. They have enough to defend, you die if you commit, they drone when you fall back, and you're in exactly the situation I've outlined. I also disagree that bio scales badly vs ling bane. I actually think that firebat marine medic trades poorly in small numbers and trades very well in large numbers, such that when you play more defensively as terran to take your own third faster your army will be at a massive advantage in the later mid game stages if zerg doesn't tech in response. It's just easier to spread and harder for zerg to surround the more bio you have. That's why I stated that more defensive play from Terran is preferable. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
play this strat piy is talking about. I think i have encountered one zerg who does this i think. So my experience are limited. But to share my experience: Against this style going heavy rax bio none-stop macro with a third at 6-8rax~. When u add factory, you can add spidermines/speed, i found this unit having good tempo vs banes/lings heavyplay. Adding more factories, not bad at all but you need constant macro from your rax. I found this particular style good against it. You need to scan quite frequently, check his gases. Drones. Lair or hive play. The problem is if he techswitches, lets say he skips the banes and goes lurkers instead. Or he starts to use burrow at lair. Sometimes muta play is annoying to since lets say u scan the spire in a good time, you have no idea if he will commit to mutas. If you know he will commit u can add 15turrets np and go more agressivestyle but u kinda do it with a dice. Guardians great to since u have no SV. Addind vikings->mutas,guardians. But they suck vs everything else. I miss that SV doesnt really work vs banes since this is the unit that deals with every techswitch from zerg Iam not saying now that this works against it or is consistent. Just sharing my experience | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
I aim to get the next patch up at the start of next week. Any dev want to comment on this? I'm curious if being able to move command an unburrowed mine indefinitely is its intentional design. Sounds like a strange bug. It will be looked into. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
On March 04 2014 23:33 Foxxan wrote: I think i know what piy is saying. Many zergs go fast third with lings/banes, but very few play this strat piy is talking about. I think i have encountered one zerg who does this i think. So my experience are limited. But to share my experience: Against this style going heavy rax bio none-stop macro with a third at 6-8rax~. When u add factory, you can add spidermines/speed, i found this unit having good tempo vs banes/lings heavyplay. Adding more factories, not bad at all but you need constant macro from your rax. I found this particular style good against it. You need to scan quite frequently, check his gases. Drones. Lair or hive play. The problem is if he techswitches, lets say he skips the banes and goes lurkers instead. Or he starts to use burrow at lair. Sometimes muta play is annoying to since lets say u scan the spire in a good time, you have no idea if he will commit to mutas. If you know he will commit u can add 15turrets np and go more agressivestyle but u kinda do it with a dice. Guardians great to since u have no SV. Addind vikings->mutas,guardians. But they suck vs everything else. I miss that SV doesnt really work vs banes since this is the unit that deals with every techswitch from zerg Iam not saying now that this works against it or is consistent. Just sharing my experience Yah this is pretty much the response I've been doing also. Lot's of macro, 3 base quite fast, mines and vultures. I've actually been doing 2 port vessels, but using the 3rd gas at the third to add in many marauders and firebats, so you have an unkillable army at about 13 min. I actually think it's very strong, and don't think theres a balance issue. I do worry about the mu once zergs figure out the timings to ling and bling to defend safely though, it can already be difficult to deal with the switches when you are defending in 3 different spots. Also, if they just build a baneling nest for 100/50, you need to completely alter your style of play. My main concern is that it's boring lol | ||
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2595 Posts
How about this: The Viper and the target (friendly targets allowed) swap positions. This would allow the same use as Abduct currently (single target finger of death) with either the cost of sacrificing the Viper or requiring clever use to snipe units that aren't well protected. I could also imagine scenarios in which this could be used like Blink, allowing Vipers to teleport away from an attacker by trading places with a cheaper friendly unit, or allowing an immobile unit (Lurkers) to teleport into a favorable position. What this doesn't offer that I'd like to see is counter-micro potential. It offers some options to the Zerg player that I think would be more interesting than Abduct, but you still can't do much against it. Maybe if the swap were triggered by a destructable projectile that couldn't be auto-targeted? | ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
| ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
| ||
|
Jawra
Sweden146 Posts
It's "instant kill" ability costs half the amount of energy. It can acquire energy for free by consuming Evo chambers or other low-cost buildings. Abduct works on any unit. If the best players were to use a Viper-centric army composition versus Mech, it would just obliterate that army. I suppose we'll have to wait for that to happen before it's balanced. Personally I like how the unit fits into the Zerg arsenal aesthetically and the consume looks quite badass and I'd have no problem with the unit if it wasn't so cost effective. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
On March 05 2014 00:47 Jawra wrote: My problem with the Viper is that it's way too cost effective in comparison to the Brood War equivalent Queen. It's "instant kill" ability costs half the amount of energy. It can acquire energy for free by consuming Evo chambers or other low-cost buildings. Abduct works on any unit. If the best players were to use a Viper-centric army composition versus Mech, it would just obliterate that army. I suppose we'll have to wait for that to happen before it's balanced. Personally I like how the unit fits into the Zerg arsenal aesthetically and the consume looks quite badass and I'd have no problem with the unit if it wasn't so cost effective. Vipers are mediocre vs mech. They're nowhere near as effective as queens were in bw vs tanks. | ||
|
Koz
Brazil13 Posts
On March 05 2014 00:54 Piy wrote: Vipers are mediocre vs mech. They're nowhere near as effective as queens were in bw vs tanks. You talk like queens have always been effective in BW. It took lots of years to people figure it out a way to use them in a cost effective way in bw. Maybe if you give time, people will create build orders and ways to use vipers in a way you would never imagine... | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On March 05 2014 00:17 AmericanUmlaut wrote: I've been thinking all day about the Abduct issue, since I feel like I should at least make some suggestion if I'm going to be critical of Abduct. How about this: The Viper and the target (friendly targets allowed) swap positions. This would allow the same use as Abduct currently (single target finger of death) with either the cost of sacrificing the Viper or requiring clever use to snipe units that aren't well protected. I could also imagine scenarios in which this could be used like Blink, allowing Vipers to teleport away from an attacker by trading places with a cheaper friendly unit, or allowing an immobile unit (Lurkers) to teleport into a favorable position. What this doesn't offer that I'd like to see is counter-micro potential. It offers some options to the Zerg player that I think would be more interesting than Abduct, but you still can't do much against it. Maybe if the swap were triggered by a destructable projectile that couldn't be auto-targeted? Only if the same applies to every SV that casts Irradiate or every HT that casts Storm... | ||
|
Jawra
Sweden146 Posts
Viper is probably fine for now, despite the abduct looking really weird and wonky. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On March 05 2014 00:47 Jawra wrote: My problem with the Viper is that it's way too cost effective in comparison to the Brood War equivalent Queen. It's "instant kill" ability costs half the amount of energy. It can acquire energy for free by consuming Evo chambers or other low-cost buildings. Abduct works on any unit. If the best players were to use a Viper-centric army composition versus Mech, it would just obliterate that army. I suppose we'll have to wait for that to happen before it's balanced. Personally I like how the unit fits into the Zerg arsenal aesthetically and the consume looks quite badass and I'd have no problem with the unit if it wasn't so cost effective. Except Terran has SV that can both EMP and Irradiate Vipers.. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
Beyond the timing issue of having to wait for broodling energy, I don't think you can really say that the viper is anywhere near as good at either task. Vipers definitely viable late game vs mech though, just not optimal currently. | ||
|
FT.aCt)Sony
United States1048 Posts
On March 04 2014 20:50 RagequitBM wrote: Your stream was okay, but if you want my honest opinion, calling people stream cheaters on stream is very tasteless. Made me tune out immediately. Maybe I'm alone on that though. Anyway, you're pretty good! Wish more people played. "2 people searching" is not very inviting. When you ask someone right upfront in the start of the game "are you streaming?" gives off a "stream cheater" persona about them. Why do you want to know if someone is streaming other than to watch them play while playing you? Yes I have a delay but that doesn't stop anything. That was the only time I said anything about that aspect. | ||
| ||
