Also, just nice game:
Starbow - Page 305
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Xiphias
Norway2222 Posts
Also, just nice game: | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On top of that, reducing attackspeed? Feels very uncreative. | ||
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On July 21 2014 17:20 Foxxan wrote: New shock still feels like shit. On top of that, reducing attackspeed? Feels very uncreative. Have you even played with the shock of the testmap or are you just generally complaining? | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On July 22 2014 02:28 404AlphaSquad wrote: Have you even played with the shock of the testmap or are you just generally complaining? Wtf do you want someone to say then if u call this generally complaining. I state my opinion on it. Jesus crist dude. | ||
Xiphias
Norway2222 Posts
On July 22 2014 02:46 Foxxan wrote: Wtf do you want someone to say then if u call this generally complaining. I state my opinion on it. Jesus crist dude. "New shock still feels like shit." sound more like complaining than constructive feedback to me as well. Try to rephrase your sentences please if you want us to take you more seriously. I can understand that it sounds like feedback to you, but it sounds like complaining for a lot of others. | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On July 22 2014 02:51 Xiphias wrote: "New shock still feels like shit." sound more like complaining than constructive feedback to me as well. Try to rephrase your sentences please if you want us to take you more seriously. I can understand that it sounds like feedback to you, but it sounds like complaining for a lot of others. So let me get this straight. Things i have written about shock on the starbowmod.com is forgotten in your brain? It didnt change my view on it, it stays the same so with the "it still feels like shit" it goes back to what ive said about the old shock which is not far from this. Jesus crist, you two. | ||
RoboPuG
Sweden29 Posts
In the game between Kalevi and Mazx it seemed that the ghost/banshee was vital to breaking sieged positions which I thought looked awesome. I think bio might still be a bit too strong considering Kalevi wasn't macroing as well as he could have in the midgame until the end and he was still breaking Mazx's sieged positions when he could have had a lot more bio which would have made it even easier but maybe Mazx expanded to heavily. But like I said, i'm no expert on balance, so the developers and playtesters of starbow can probably analyse this game better than me. In conclusion, I think players should be allowed to explore bio more in tvt because it definately seems viable (maybe too strong). To the developers of Starbow, keep working guys. You're doing great work and I'm really enjoying watching Starbow. I just want MORE!!! ![]() | ||
Xiphias
Norway2222 Posts
Patch for 21 of July Protoss
Terran
Zerg
Bug
Also streaming ![]() | ||
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
If only a 1/4 of them laddered >< Edit: Thanks Day9 ![]() | ||
royalroadweed
United States8300 Posts
| ||
Hider
Denmark9309 Posts
On July 22 2014 03:04 RoboPuG wrote: As a spectator of Starbow only, I think the shock ability is nice. I have only seen a few games with bio in Starbow and the ghost's shock ability has never stood out to me as a serious balance issue. Maybe it was too strong before (I'm no expert on balance) so nerfing it was probably for the best. In the game between Kalevi and Mazx it seemed that the ghost/banshee was vital to breaking sieged positions which I thought looked awesome. I think bio might still be a bit too strong considering Kalevi wasn't macroing as well as he could have in the midgame until the end and he was still breaking Mazx's sieged positions when he could have had a lot more bio which would have made it even easier but maybe Mazx expanded to heavily. But like I said, i'm no expert on balance, so the developers and playtesters of starbow can probably analyse this game better than me. In conclusion, I think players should be allowed to explore bio more in tvt because it definately seems viable (maybe too strong). To the developers of Starbow, keep working guys. You're doing great work and I'm really enjoying watching Starbow. I just want MORE!!! ![]() General observation: Poorly designed abilities can seem fun and cool the first time you see them, but when they are used on a more stabile basis, the design flaws become apparent to anyone. Examples: In beta Day9 thought Forcefielnds and Collosus were awesome.... Fungal growth was also considered cool once. General characeteristic of poorly designed abilities = No (practical) countermicro. | ||
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
I wonder if this could be part of the reason for why starbow has never quite caught on with the general public. Everything in the game can be countered and shut down by a superior opponent and it's difficult to exploit abusive aspects of the game as much. For casual players that take the initiative to play just once this could be rather daunting and paradoxically make it feel like you have no agency in the game, and nothing in the game is actually effective. I think this might be true: starbow is designed for long-term playability, while sc2 is flashier and more interested in making a good first impression (which is after all the most important one). | ||
Hider
Denmark9309 Posts
I find it interesting that abilities in starbow are generally designed to allow more counterplay. Rift being an example: it's more modest than recall and you can take more time to shoot the protoss units making the ability more strategic and difficult to use. On the other hand, as a protoss player recall is undoubtedly cooler to use as it's rather effective. The way this ability is used (and always inteded to be) was to make it possible for aggressive units to escape. Not to be able to defend. Since it's always used in this way, then it doesn't really have any countermicro either. I don't agree with Starbow having more any new counterbased abilities/units which didn't exist in BW. Instead, it has a lot of click-and-effect abilities/spam-oriented abilities. Relative to Sc2, the Banshee's new cloak also makes the micro more onesided than in Sc2 you can use detection/scans to counter the Banshee's. That interaction doesn't really exist in TvT starbow. Instead, Starbow moves in for 5 seconds, attacks --> moves back. No real realistic countermicro here. I wonder if this could be part of the reason for why starbow has never quite caught on with the general public. Everything in the game can be countered and shut down by a superior opponent and it's difficult to exploit abusive aspects of the game as much. For casual players that take the initiative to play just once this could be rather daunting and paradoxically make it feel like you have no agency in the game, and nothing in the game is actually effective. Well, besides that's not being accurate. I think Starbow was very likely to decline regardless of what happened, but the speed at which it declined depended mostly on the game-quality. I watched everything back then, and the only entertaining game I can remember watching was Beastqt vs Dragon. 95%+ of other games were pretty bad during the first 2 months of Starbow. If there had been like a daily influx of VODS with really entertaining games, it would have motivated players to keep playing the game + more people to watch --> more sponsors. | ||
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On July 22 2014 07:05 Hider wrote: General characeteristic of poorly designed abilities = No (practical) countermicro. Like dark swarm? | ||
Hider
Denmark9309 Posts
No. Dark Swarm has countermicro (except for Siege Tanks). That's FYI also why I am a big fan of faster unsieging for Siege Tanks (for both Sc2 and Starbow). I think siege-duration is important as it creates immobility, but there could be so many more improved unit interactions with 50% faster unsiege. Imagine, how much more "lame" the Lurker would be if it had a 3-4 second unburrow duration. IMO part of what makes the Lurker fun to use is it's unburrow/borruw duration is as fast as it possibly can without creating imbalances. Given that there have been discussions of buffing Siege Tanks anyway, I just feel that one should look at ways to make it more microrewarding at the same time. | ||
royalroadweed
United States8300 Posts
| ||
RoboPuG
Sweden29 Posts
On July 22 2014 07:05 Hider wrote: General observation: Poorly designed abilities can seem fun and cool the first time you see them, but when they are used on a more stabile basis, the design flaws become apparent to anyone. Examples: In beta Day9 thought Forcefielnds and Collosus were awesome.... Fungal growth was also considered cool once. General characeteristic of poorly designed abilities = No (practical) countermicro. Hider: You often have very good insights but aren't you being a bit to negative regarding the shock ability? No countermicro? Really?? What about baiting shocks with vultures, splitting against it, having turrets in front of tanks for detection and scanning wisely if your position is good to detect advancing cloaked ghosts? In the vod Mazx was scanning pretty much every time Kalevi tried to nuke with the ghosts and it's definately possible to focusfire down ghosts with vultures or tanks when bio tries to push against sieged positions. I really don't understand why you think this ability is so bad. It can be countered in many different ways, either before engagements or during. It would be nice if you could either explain more precisely why this ability is so poorly designed or if you could show why through vods. | ||
Hider
Denmark9309 Posts
On July 22 2014 13:36 RoboPuG wrote: Hider: You often have very good insights but aren't you being a bit to negative regarding the shock ability? No countermicro? Really?? What about baiting shocks with vultures, splitting against it, having turrets in front of tanks for detection and scanning wisely if your position is good to detect advancing cloaked ghosts? In the vod Mazx was scanning pretty much every time Kalevi tried to nuke with the ghosts and it's definately possible to focusfire down ghosts with vultures or tanks when bio tries to push against sieged positions. I really don't understand why you think this ability is so bad. It can be countered in many different ways, either before engagements or during. It would be nice if you could either explain more precisely why this ability is so poorly designed or if you could show why through vods. I wrote this on the Starbowmod forum. Be aware that I define countermicro as micro that is occuring during the actual battle. Making a flank prior to the battle isn't actual countermicro. Your examples of "countermicro" applies to Fungal Growth and Forcefields as well. Further, I wasn't talking about Nuke here, but about the Shock in itself. I wonder whether anyone tested whether it's actually efficient to try and actively avoid Shock during battles or by presplitting prior to battles. To me, that seems impractical in theory and thus it wouldn't surprise me if all you could do was just to accept getting hitted by Shocks during the battle with your Dragoons while focussing on keeping Reaver alive. If the intention of the projectile speed is to reward "avoid"-micro during actual battles (thus not rewarding "kite"-micro), then I would have preferred a much slower projectile speed with a larger AOE and casting range. If we assume countermicro should come after the ability has been casted on the units - by moving "shocked" Dragoons away from the battle (as they can't attack anyway) - what is the purpose of the slow effect then? All that accomplishes is to make the micro less practical. Why not simply opt for no slow-effect, but slightly larger AOE instead? To me the current Shock just feels like a bunch of random concepts being mixed together without any real focus on specific micro interactions. | ||
MarlieChurphy
United States2063 Posts
| ||
Sikian
Spain177 Posts
On July 22 2014 12:13 royalroadweed wrote: I heard that the ghost regular attack will go pew pew. Awesome idea. They will. Pew pew. | ||
| ||