EPTDoes anyone know what the reason of the devs were to keep the stalker in its current state?
Starbow - Page 54
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
.swz.
73 Posts
Does anyone know what the reason of the devs were to keep the stalker in its current state? | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:13 .swz. wrote: I had a brief look at Protoss now, and what came to my attention was the role of the stalker. By default is has a blink with a cooldown of 16seconds (which is quite long) but to build this unit it requires a twilight council. Even though it has a significant higher movement speed than the dragoon, I dont really see the stalker playing an important role. Feels like a lategame reaper :p Does anyone know what the reason of the devs were to keep the stalker in its current state? Different type of attack from Dragoons. Dragoons do well against heavy armored units, Stalkers do bonus against Light units. They are alternative to fighting Mutas and Banshees without needing to go for Corsairs since Dragoons are quite slow and even in straight up fight won't really trade efficiently. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
| ||
|
TaShadan
Germany1960 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:13 .swz. wrote: I had a brief look at Protoss now, and what came to my attention was the role of the stalker. By default is has a blink with a cooldown of 16seconds (which is quite long) but to build this unit it requires a twilight council. Even though it has a significant higher movement speed than the dragoon, I dont really see the stalker playing an important role. Feels like a lategame reaper :p Does anyone know what the reason of the devs were to keep the stalker in its current state? In the early stages of development kabel removed the stalker and added the dragoon. After that he removed the dragoon and added the stalker... this happend several times. Now they are both implemented. | ||
|
Ingsoc
59 Posts
A little twitter timeline of how Idra's Starbow experience. | ||
|
Gullis
Sweden740 Posts
| ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:49 Gullis wrote: Approved by idra :p Which is surprising, since even BW wasn't. If it gets super big(IE consistently more viewers than SC2), I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard hires the devs and incorporates some of their stuff. Time will tell. | ||
|
Orek
1665 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:01 Ahli wrote: 1. Marine prepares to use its weapon 2. Trigger executes which results in a debuff added to the Marine, if it determines that it should miss. The Debuff has a duration of 1.5 and reduces the ranged damage type to 0.5 damage. 3. Marine deals 0.5 damage at target 4. Marine prepares to use its weapon 5. Trigger starts, now it determines that the unit should hit 6. Marine deals 0.5 damage as the debuff is still on the unit This and a few other problems have been resolved. I've fixed the system to work fine in every situation in the game. I will post a changelog in case Kabel doesn't post one somewhere. The chance to miss is 50%. There is nothing added to it that alters the chance when a unit missed consecutively. So, when a unit is unlucky, it can shoot a few times up a cliff and never deal more than 0.5 damage. Thank you for the detailed answer. I get it now. I wish 0(zero) was the minimum damage in game instead of 0.5 Also, is it actually possible to make something like IF target is on equal or lower ground, then deal normal damage IF target is on higher ground, then deal half of normal damage ,where normal damage = attack value - armor value, and the chance to hit is always 100%. That's what I originally meant as ideal solution if programming it isn't that difficult. | ||
|
MstrJinbo
United States1251 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:55 Daralii wrote: Which is surprising, since even BW wasn't. If it gets super big(IE consistently more viewers than SC2), I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard hires the devs and incorporates some of their stuff. Time will tell. I suppose there could be a first time for everything. I wouldn't advise the Starbow devs to quit their day jobs though. | ||
|
Ahli
Germany355 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:59 Orek wrote: Also, is it actually possible to make something like IF target is on equal or lower ground, then deal normal damage IF target is on higher ground, then deal half of normal damage ,where normal damage = attack value - armor value, and the chance to hit is always 100%. That's what I originally meant as ideal solution if programming it isn't that difficult. No. Half damage is possible, but you can't make it reduce the armor before halving the damage. Armor is always reduced last as seen on SC2's Immortal receiving a max of 9/8/7 damage with each shield upgrade. Halving the raw damage input is easily doable, but you can't change how armor works in this game. So, you can't easily recreate the exact way damage was handled in Broodwar without triggering every damage effect in the game. But that might cause a lot of lags and forces overkills as triggers adds a delay of 0.0625 game seconds as they don't run instantly (which actually comes closer to Broodwar). As a reminder, in Broodwar, armor was reduced before the damage was scaled. For example, 4 armor would result in 1 less damage received when a Broodwar Ghost hits an Ultralisk (concussive damage vs large unit). | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On January 16 2014 20:55 Daralii wrote: Which is surprising, since even BW wasn't. If it gets super big(IE consistently more viewers than SC2), I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard hires the devs and incorporates some of their stuff. Time will tell. I doubt it, and not because the MOD is bad, it looks totally badass right now actually. Problem is that Blizzard have done allot of bad decisions lately. Most likley the devs would have a better chance just doing a standalone like DOTA/War3  | ||
|
FrozenProbe
Italy276 Posts
On January 16 2014 21:30 Integra wrote: I doubt it, and not because the MOD is bad, it looks totally badass right now actually. Problem is that Blizzard have done allot of bad decisions lately. Most likley the devs would have a better chance just doing a standalone like DOTA/War3 They can't do a standalone, every unit is a blizzard concept... | ||
|
TaShadan
Germany1960 Posts
On January 16 2014 21:40 FrozenProbe wrote: They can't do a standalone, every unit is a blizzard concept... They can do a standalone but they would need a new engine, models etc. | ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
| ||
|
SinCitta
Germany2127 Posts
On January 16 2014 21:42 TaShadan wrote: They can do a standalone but they would need a new engine, models etc. In other words, they can't do a standalone. | ||
|
labbe
Sweden1456 Posts
| ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
But its weird, it only affects Arbiter. HT and others were fine. | ||
|
NapkinBox
United States314 Posts
On January 16 2014 21:44 SinCitta wrote: In other words, they can't do a standalone. Then there's that one game company that loves modders. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On January 16 2014 21:30 Integra wrote: I doubt it, and not because the MOD is bad, it looks totally badass right now actually. Problem is that Blizzard have done allot of bad decisions lately. Most likley the devs would have a better chance just doing a standalone like DOTA/War3 The only things I'd say were bad decisions were trusting Jay Wilson with D3 and turning down Icefrog. In light of the latter, I can see them jumping at the chance to prevent the same mistake. | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On January 16 2014 22:01 NapkinBox wrote: Then there's that one game company that loves modders. Bethesda? | ||
| ||
