|
On November 11 2014 00:22 BaronVonOwn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 23:09 Garfailed wrote:
Just saw the new units... Why do protoss's only get gimmicky units every expansion?
We've been playing collosus deathballs since WOL. Since hots came out, we sometimes include tempests, but thats about it, Why can't protoss get new units that actually change the way they play? Like a new gateway unit or something. This new disruptor will probably occasionally get played, or get included in said deathball. But in the end, it'll still be the same stalker collosus deathball that we'll have to play :S yea... The disruptor is actually the answer for protosses who don't want to play deathball style. It's useful in drop harass and in small armies. It does 150 damage currently, enough for just 1 to devastate a clump of marines or zerglings and leaves roaches/marauders in the red. As any protoss knows 1 colossus is pretty useless, you need at least 3-4 before your army can do anything useful aside from turtle under a nexus cannon. It's going to give protoss an actual, viable early game and it's going to make this game so much more fun to play.
It also brings back quasi-reaver micro. Run a disruptor into a clump, let it detonate, pick it up with a prism, wait for cooldown, repeat. It has a very high cost(I realize it'll probably change) and will be very unforgiving, but I like it conceptually.
On November 11 2014 00:26 Salteador Neo wrote:
Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit?
Also disrupter, while I kinda like the design for some reason, I think it might be hard to balance just like it happened to the widow mine. (IIRC first it got nerfed for looking OP, then rebuffed to better stats than at the start)
Main difference is that you can micro to avoid a disruptor detonation, you really can't to avoid a widow shot.
|
On November 10 2014 19:38 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 15:20 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 13:35 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 13:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 12:55 Amui wrote:On November 10 2014 12:33 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 10 2014 11:26 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 10:12 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 10 2014 09:56 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 09:43 pure.Wasted wrote:
[quote]
I'd much rather Siege Mode went back to being an upgrade than remove more upgrades from the game. The p[roblem I see at the moment is that toss has no way of dealing with cyclone or range banshee without blink. I'm also wondering if protoss tech times are too long in a fast expansion style game. what do people think about removing cybercore requirement for tech structures? Or removing warp gate research? Protoss can't deal with range Banshee without blink? What happened to Phoenix? Or Feedback? Phoenix kills Cyclones dead, too, as do Colossi. Yeah, my initial thought was that PvT will be oracle > phoenix > carrier form now on. Cyclones can shoot up, so i'm not sure how phoenix are ment to 'stop it dead' Can't shoot up if you can't shoot. Graviton, baby. Graviton. I don't know any of the cyclones stats, but assuming it's light, you need 2 phoenix, or probably one phoenix+2 stalkers to kill a cyclone. Still it seems a bit extreme that once terran makes a single cyclone, you can't venture out onto the map as a protoss until you've either gotten blink, phoenix, collosi, or you have enough units that a couple of cyclones don't scare you. I honestly think cyclone lockon should take some time, similar to a seeker missile. Yeah, but that's a stat-points criticism. If zealots came out with 3.00 speed and 2k hitpoints they'd be broken, but they're design would still be interesting (that of tanky melee basic units) The discussion should less be on the tactical aspects of units as they are, but of what direction those tactical aspects should be shifted towards? For example, I love the idea of a mobile "lock-on" single target mech unit to give mech a baseline unit from which to play off of. I actually wish its damage was higher, its range lower, and its speed require an upgrade to reach. Too slow to be scary without support in the early game, but fast enough to be useful en-mass in the late game. Nothing specific, just where I see its place in the eb and flow of a matchup should be in. That's exactly what i'm trying to do. I don't understand what 'role' the cyclone is attempting to fill, but here are my assumptions: it needs to be fast enough to kite stalkers. it needs to do enough damage to kill units. it has the ability to 'lockon' from close rnage and then have very long range it can shoot anything that it can see if it moves much slower than a stalker it'll just die (moves into stalker range, aquires lock but then can't move away fast enough and stalkers wlak over and kill it) if it moves same speed or even slightly slower than a stalker the stalker will get 1 or maybe 2 shots off and then die. a ciritical mass of stalkers will be required to 1 shot cyclone to stop this pattern. this number is crucial. right now i'd say this is 'too many'. 1 would obviously be 'too few'. because it seems this unit is based around stalkers, the slower, shorter range zealots and sentries are completely worthless vs the cyclone (except maybe a FF to lock it in your base?) the issues for toss around this unit are that it's fast, so it can move across map and harass early int he game. if toss don't invest in X numbers of stalkers they are just dead. literally. build order loss. it's possible toss can hold off cyclone with early phoenix. I don't know how this will work in reality since if the terran sends a few marines and continues to make cyclones i think they will just kill the phoenix. grav beam has range 4, so all cyclones will lockon to phoenix. i don't think toss would ahve time to build pylon, gateway, cybercore, robo, robo bay, colossus + colossus range before cyclone arrive at protoss base. note : not sure if range is required. maybe with enoguh ground forces / nexus cannon the cyclone could be kept back?) vs the supply depot, barracks, techlab + factory, lift factory onto techlab (assuming fastest build orders for both) + travel time. Since immortals are useless vs cyclone (too slow, no hardend shields) toss should either go stargate or blink. Am i missing anything yet? Your stuck on the stalker speed--like I said, that's just a stat attribute. Its a ground unit designed to move and shoot, but be able to extend its range once it "commits/locks on" to a target. This means they want this unit to be able to kite, but before it can kite anything it has to get within range and fight close range long enough to lock on. Main attributes to look at: speed (kite effectiveness) lock on time (how long should it be vulnerable) DPS potential (do we want this to kite targets for a long time or only a short time) These are all arbitrary. They could make it slightly faster than zealots and have stalkers be their hard counter. They could make them have high damage and speed to counter stalkers, but a long lock on timer so they're hard countered by zealots. etc... The stats themselves are arbitrary and changes what units they are good against. But what we should discuss is "what aspect of mech is fixed/improved by unit like this." and then focus its stats on fixing that weakness. We can't discuss what aspect of Mech is improved with this when we assume that the unit stats change massively. You can't say this is a good unit early for pokes against Protoss while allowing the assumption that a stalker can kill it, since then a single stalker shuts it down. Stats and design are connected. You give a unit stats so that it can fullfill a purpose. That is called designing a unit. Whether the cyclone has 36, 40 or 30dps doesn't greatly alter its design, but when you alter its stats so that stalkers just outrun them when the original purpose was the other way around then it is a redesign.
See, you're not getting it.
Their design has nothing to do with the stalker. You can design them to be the kite of ANYTHING, right now their speed is made similar to stalkers. But they could be slowed down so that they're meant to kite roaches, or sped up and made to kite phoenixes. What is important is we talk about what units does a mech army want to kite in the first place. What is important is talking about how much of the power of the unit is frontloaded (comes fully functional) or backloaded (needs late game upgrades). Getting stuck talking about stalkers is the opposite of talking about the Cyclone.
|
Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit?
Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you.
If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher.
|
On November 11 2014 00:28 Daralii wrote:
It also brings back quasi-reaver micro. Run a disruptor into a clump, let it detonate, pick it up with a prism, wait for cooldown, repeat. It has a very high cost(I realize it'll probably change) and will be very unforgiving, but I like it conceptually.
Yes, it will be unforgiving, but so was the reaver. The reaver had a pretty long attack cooldown, half the time it would only get off 1 scarab before being destroyed. Of course the reaver also only cost 200/100, if the disruptor costs anything like that it would be super OP.
|
On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher.
Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar.
2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio.
|
I thought the Disruptor is supposed to be a scarab without a reaver, kind of like how the widow mine is a spider mine without a vulture.
|
On November 11 2014 00:12 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 23:24 The_Red_Viper wrote:On November 10 2014 22:44 Big J wrote:On November 10 2014 22:17 RaFox17 wrote:On November 10 2014 22:04 playa wrote:On November 10 2014 21:20 OtherWorld wrote:On November 10 2014 20:50 playa wrote:
Since, apparently, it's balanced to be able to attack the enemy without the enemy ever having a chance to attack you, I hope they look into that concept with Toss. I'd love if they would toy around with a reaver, whose scarabs could fly the length of the map, becoming invulnerable once they land, and then do w/e damage locusts do.
Yeah, it's impossible to even type that with a straight face. Some of this stuff is so ridiculous to me that I refuse to accept it's a real thing. I mean, you'd have to be an absolute idiot to believe some of these units are for real and that it's not a joke. I'm still waiting for the real announcement of units. I'm not falling for it... Is there someone paying David Kim to keep the swarm host? Someone has to be profiting off this, because it sure as hell isn't going to be viewers.
I would trade so many Toss units for this new swarm host. I can't imagine ever being able to play a game with this unit and not just be sitting there laughing your ass off. You know Blizz made the new units voluntarily imba so that people would use them at BlizzCon right? I'm so tired of hearing that mantra about how they make everything OP to start with, yet that never seems to apply to Toss units. 300 gas for the disruptor, while it was struggling to kill a freaking drone during the show matches. Do you know how awesome a unit would have to be for me to be encouraged to make it, despite costing 300 gas (I refuse to even make archons out of templars)? It would have to be the new swarm host. And somehow I doubt that got a price increase. The concept of the swarm host sucks. The concept is imbalanced. The unit is even more imbalanced now. After the horrible games they have caused everyone, they not only owe everyone an apology, they owe it to us/me to remove it asap. And they owe it to themselves to go into rehab for whatever mind altering drugs they must have been doing way too much. There is no way someone could come up with a worse unit than the swarm host. Mech being unbeatable shouldn't become a Toss problem. I think you should calm down a bit. They are gonna change the cost and stats of units a lot so no need to rage. SH might not be the best unit design but zerg still needs a unit that has more than 6 range to deal with the garage both T and P can deal with their death balls. I bet you would like to see toss just kill zerg´s left and right with their beautiful death ball with many micro opportunities, but in a fair game you have to give the other side some tools also. Maybe SH is not the most enjoyable but please offer some changes that would allow them to cut the SH instead of saying how much they annoy you. They reset the game a lot. I currently don't think the SH is needed for LotV. Tempest cant hit air so BLs are viable. Colossi are nerfed. I'm not on playa's side given how poorly he presented his arguments but I agree with his original point: they didnt make the new units imba just so that people use them. Look at the ravager or the disruptor, those units couldnt hit anything. 5lurkers couldnt kill a stalker. The Herc disnt look broken and was deflected shortly after doing some damage. The swarm host is a crap design and should go. Now is the time. Not in HotS where he is necessary and not half way into LotV when it might have been balances to be necessary. Right now! Tempest cant hit air so BLs are viable Tempest have an ability which can hit air, it does 500 (?) dmg over time 500dmg over 50seconds from like 9range (according to the PvZ showmatch) is a very strong damage/range nerf, but most importantly (I believe) it doesn't stack. So you cannot queue 3Tempests to one-shot BL after BL.
I am not quite sure what you mean, one ability cast will kill a broodlord if the zerg doesn't have queens with energy nearby.
Show nested quote +Look at the ravager or the disruptor, those units couldnt hit anything The ravager did just fine when used in situations where he should be usefull (against deathballs/ immobile units). Yes he isn't that useful against units which are fast, but that is no real surprise. Can't remember a situation in which it was ravagers vs deathball, could you please point to which situation you point?
Well i am not talking about a specific situation, but i think it is fair to say that you will hit that ability vs deathballs rather easily? So i think they "counter" deathballs to some extent.
Show nested quote +The disruptor wasn't really used all that much, so it is pretty weird to even make a comment about it tbh. I actually like that you need some practice with a unit first, seems to be the case here. Show nested quote +5lurkers couldnt kill a stalker Oh pls. Maybe you could argue that the spines move a bit too slow, but that won't be a huge problem against bigger armies, in that one engagement against a toss ball they looked just fine. Did they look like they are too powerful? Because that was what I was arguing against. Unless you believe those units looked very strong than my point still stands.
Oh, well fair enough^^ But even then, 9 range lurkers sound pretty scary to me, don't know.
Show nested quote +The swarm host is a crap design and should go The SH got redesigned, i really think we should wait a bit to make any comments... The swarm hosts design is still to release units from far away and then kill stuff for free with it. There is no risk involved, it's not like a mutalisk or medivac that actually can be killed when they try to harass. The SHs balancing is still going to be about engaging it either with air or when the spawn is on cooldown and dodging the spawns anytime you don't have overwhelming numbers, but not about interacting. That's why I still call it a crap design. I've always been a guy that believed that free units can be balanced and even fun, but I think blizzard is pretty bad at implementing them in Starcraft (I think they did a good job in Warcraft) and I would rather want them to stop trying.
Well they don't burrow now, so you don't need detection to kill them, they also spawn every 60 seconds now, so they are fairly "situational" and not just "hey i burrow them there and they do their job regardless".
I think we need to see more game with them before you can come to these negative conclusions tbh.
In general I really think we should give feedback now and not wait for a beta. Why? Because blizzard can only fix so much in a 4-5months. And with the HotS beta they have shown that many of their concepts were half-baked and they actually rolled in more changes from alpha to beta than they implemented in beta to release. (examples for this would be corruptor/nydus changes, their promise to change the Overseer, Warhound removal, BC nerfed back, Terran upgrade changes taken back). Like, any change they make in the beta will have a test period of like 1-2months before it will get evalutated. The beta will last a few months. That means there is not a lot of room for changes once the stuff is in the beta. And in particular, there will be thinks simply not working out at all and those will have priority over balanced-but-uninspired stuff.
Yeah sure, but how can you give real feedback when you don't even have played it yet? I don't think any feedback right now is really valuable tbh, at least not concerning unit interactions. We simply don't have any real data to make these claims imo.
YOu could argue that they should change these things FASTER in the beta phase (maybe invite more people faster too), i would agree with you, but right now all we have is some basic stats (not even all of them) and a few videos.
I don't think that is enough to have educated opinions at all 
|
On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio.
Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that.
Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves. IMO Immortal should and Sentry should be balanced around a movement speed of 2.75 so protoss is less reliant on recall as escape mechanic.
|
On November 11 2014 00:53 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio. Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that. Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves.
BW had no banelings. I don't think the zerg won't build ANY banelings just cause he has the lurker now.
|
On November 11 2014 00:53 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio. Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that. Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves. IMO Immortal should and Sentry should be balanced around a movement speed of 2.75 so protoss is less reliant on recall as escape mechanic.
Ye true.
I think the creep speed bonus might affect this. Hm. Thats so sad.
Things are changed in lotv tho with the lurker since zerg have alot more larva compared to broodwar, but not as good zerglings.
Lurkers do outrange widowmines even without the range upgrade.
All in all, faster lurkers is probably more fun but hard to say.
Larva and creep is a problem here.
|
On November 11 2014 00:55 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:53 Hider wrote:On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio. Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that. Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves. BW had no banelings. I don't think the zerg won't build ANY banelings just cause he has the lurker now.
I think the Lurker should be designed around offering a different style/different options to zerg. E.g. if we could have both 4M vs Muta/bling and Lurker/muta/ling vs tank/marine/medivac/raven it would be really cool. Sure you could mix some Lurkers and Banelings together and you will likely opt for that in the lategame. But at least in the midgame I like to zerg having the options of these very distinctive styles and therefore it is important that the Lurker has a fun interaction against these bio units.
With Collosus at 8 range, I think Lurker range (with upgrade) could be 8 as well, but with faster movement speed.
I think the creep speed bonus might affect this. Hm. Thats so sad.
Making Lurkers benefit from creep spread is just dumb as this unit already has a defenders advantage in itself (same applied to Swarm Host). The role of creep spread is to add a defenders advantage to units which doesn't have a defenders advantage in itself (such as the Baneling). Having too large of a defenders advantage just promotes turtling and poor interactions when its related to the movement speed.
|
On November 11 2014 00:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 19:38 Big J wrote:On November 10 2014 15:20 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 13:35 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 13:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 12:55 Amui wrote:On November 10 2014 12:33 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 10 2014 11:26 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 10:12 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 10 2014 09:56 Kharnage wrote:
[quote]
The p[roblem I see at the moment is that toss has no way of dealing with cyclone or range banshee without blink.
I'm also wondering if protoss tech times are too long in a fast expansion style game.
what do people think about removing cybercore requirement for tech structures?
Or removing warp gate research? Protoss can't deal with range Banshee without blink? What happened to Phoenix? Or Feedback? Phoenix kills Cyclones dead, too, as do Colossi. Yeah, my initial thought was that PvT will be oracle > phoenix > carrier form now on. Cyclones can shoot up, so i'm not sure how phoenix are ment to 'stop it dead' Can't shoot up if you can't shoot. Graviton, baby. Graviton. I don't know any of the cyclones stats, but assuming it's light, you need 2 phoenix, or probably one phoenix+2 stalkers to kill a cyclone. Still it seems a bit extreme that once terran makes a single cyclone, you can't venture out onto the map as a protoss until you've either gotten blink, phoenix, collosi, or you have enough units that a couple of cyclones don't scare you. I honestly think cyclone lockon should take some time, similar to a seeker missile. Yeah, but that's a stat-points criticism. If zealots came out with 3.00 speed and 2k hitpoints they'd be broken, but they're design would still be interesting (that of tanky melee basic units) The discussion should less be on the tactical aspects of units as they are, but of what direction those tactical aspects should be shifted towards? For example, I love the idea of a mobile "lock-on" single target mech unit to give mech a baseline unit from which to play off of. I actually wish its damage was higher, its range lower, and its speed require an upgrade to reach. Too slow to be scary without support in the early game, but fast enough to be useful en-mass in the late game. Nothing specific, just where I see its place in the eb and flow of a matchup should be in. That's exactly what i'm trying to do. I don't understand what 'role' the cyclone is attempting to fill, but here are my assumptions: it needs to be fast enough to kite stalkers. it needs to do enough damage to kill units. it has the ability to 'lockon' from close rnage and then have very long range it can shoot anything that it can see if it moves much slower than a stalker it'll just die (moves into stalker range, aquires lock but then can't move away fast enough and stalkers wlak over and kill it) if it moves same speed or even slightly slower than a stalker the stalker will get 1 or maybe 2 shots off and then die. a ciritical mass of stalkers will be required to 1 shot cyclone to stop this pattern. this number is crucial. right now i'd say this is 'too many'. 1 would obviously be 'too few'. because it seems this unit is based around stalkers, the slower, shorter range zealots and sentries are completely worthless vs the cyclone (except maybe a FF to lock it in your base?) the issues for toss around this unit are that it's fast, so it can move across map and harass early int he game. if toss don't invest in X numbers of stalkers they are just dead. literally. build order loss. it's possible toss can hold off cyclone with early phoenix. I don't know how this will work in reality since if the terran sends a few marines and continues to make cyclones i think they will just kill the phoenix. grav beam has range 4, so all cyclones will lockon to phoenix. i don't think toss would ahve time to build pylon, gateway, cybercore, robo, robo bay, colossus + colossus range before cyclone arrive at protoss base. note : not sure if range is required. maybe with enoguh ground forces / nexus cannon the cyclone could be kept back?) vs the supply depot, barracks, techlab + factory, lift factory onto techlab (assuming fastest build orders for both) + travel time. Since immortals are useless vs cyclone (too slow, no hardend shields) toss should either go stargate or blink. Am i missing anything yet? Your stuck on the stalker speed--like I said, that's just a stat attribute. Its a ground unit designed to move and shoot, but be able to extend its range once it "commits/locks on" to a target. This means they want this unit to be able to kite, but before it can kite anything it has to get within range and fight close range long enough to lock on. Main attributes to look at: speed (kite effectiveness) lock on time (how long should it be vulnerable) DPS potential (do we want this to kite targets for a long time or only a short time) These are all arbitrary. They could make it slightly faster than zealots and have stalkers be their hard counter. They could make them have high damage and speed to counter stalkers, but a long lock on timer so they're hard countered by zealots. etc... The stats themselves are arbitrary and changes what units they are good against. But what we should discuss is "what aspect of mech is fixed/improved by unit like this." and then focus its stats on fixing that weakness. We can't discuss what aspect of Mech is improved with this when we assume that the unit stats change massively. You can't say this is a good unit early for pokes against Protoss while allowing the assumption that a stalker can kill it, since then a single stalker shuts it down. Stats and design are connected. You give a unit stats so that it can fullfill a purpose. That is called designing a unit. Whether the cyclone has 36, 40 or 30dps doesn't greatly alter its design, but when you alter its stats so that stalkers just outrun them when the original purpose was the other way around then it is a redesign. See, you're not getting it. Their design has nothing to do with the stalker. You can design them to be the kite of ANYTHING, right now their speed is made similar to stalkers. But they could be slowed down so that they're meant to kite roaches, or sped up and made to kite phoenixes. What is important is we talk about what units does a mech army want to kite in the first place. What is important is talking about how much of the power of the unit is frontloaded (comes fully functional) or backloaded (needs late game upgrades). Getting stuck talking about stalkers is the opposite of talking about the Cyclone.
The stalker is just an example. Let me put it this way:
If you give a unit 100range you still don't know if this is a longrange unit by design or a shortrange unit. Only if you know that the range of all other starcraft units is in between 0.25 to 15 you will realize that this is by far the biggest artillery in the game.
Same goes for the discussion about any unit in the game. Only when you compare the cyclone to stalkers/roaches/hydras/marines/marauders/immortals you can make conclusions about its design. It's current design is that it can kite all of those units (and many more) without being touched at all, while it is basically defenselss against something like speed-zerglings because they just run up and surround and that's it for the cyclone.
|
we had those in warcraft 3 ... 12 years ago
|
On November 11 2014 00:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:55 The_Red_Viper wrote:On November 11 2014 00:53 Hider wrote:On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio. Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that. Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves. BW had no banelings. I don't think the zerg won't build ANY banelings just cause he has the lurker now. I think the Lurker should be designed around offering a different style/different options to zerg. E.g. if we could have both 4M vs Muta/bling and Lurker/muta/ling vs tank/marine/medivac/raven it would be really cool. Sure you could mix some Lurkers and Banelings together and you will likely opt for that in the lategame. But at least in the midgame I like to zerg having the options of these very distinctive styles and therefore it is important that the Lurker has a fun interaction against these bio units. With Collosus at 8 range, I think Lurker range (with upgrade) could be 8 as well, but with faster movement speed.
I actually think lurkers will be primarily used with roach/hydra/ravager armies.
If you don't go for roaches you still will need some banelings, thus i don't see a real problem with the lurker being slower than stimmed bio.
But this is pretty theoretical, cause we don't really know how hercs will influence bio vs zerg rigth now 
|
On November 11 2014 01:02 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 19:38 Big J wrote:On November 10 2014 15:20 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 13:35 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 13:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 10 2014 12:55 Amui wrote:On November 10 2014 12:33 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 10 2014 11:26 Kharnage wrote:On November 10 2014 10:12 pure.Wasted wrote:
[quote]
Protoss can't deal with range Banshee without blink? What happened to Phoenix? Or Feedback?
Phoenix kills Cyclones dead, too, as do Colossi. Yeah, my initial thought was that PvT will be oracle > phoenix > carrier form now on. Cyclones can shoot up, so i'm not sure how phoenix are ment to 'stop it dead' Can't shoot up if you can't shoot. Graviton, baby. Graviton. I don't know any of the cyclones stats, but assuming it's light, you need 2 phoenix, or probably one phoenix+2 stalkers to kill a cyclone. Still it seems a bit extreme that once terran makes a single cyclone, you can't venture out onto the map as a protoss until you've either gotten blink, phoenix, collosi, or you have enough units that a couple of cyclones don't scare you. I honestly think cyclone lockon should take some time, similar to a seeker missile. Yeah, but that's a stat-points criticism. If zealots came out with 3.00 speed and 2k hitpoints they'd be broken, but they're design would still be interesting (that of tanky melee basic units) The discussion should less be on the tactical aspects of units as they are, but of what direction those tactical aspects should be shifted towards? For example, I love the idea of a mobile "lock-on" single target mech unit to give mech a baseline unit from which to play off of. I actually wish its damage was higher, its range lower, and its speed require an upgrade to reach. Too slow to be scary without support in the early game, but fast enough to be useful en-mass in the late game. Nothing specific, just where I see its place in the eb and flow of a matchup should be in. That's exactly what i'm trying to do. I don't understand what 'role' the cyclone is attempting to fill, but here are my assumptions: it needs to be fast enough to kite stalkers. it needs to do enough damage to kill units. it has the ability to 'lockon' from close rnage and then have very long range it can shoot anything that it can see if it moves much slower than a stalker it'll just die (moves into stalker range, aquires lock but then can't move away fast enough and stalkers wlak over and kill it) if it moves same speed or even slightly slower than a stalker the stalker will get 1 or maybe 2 shots off and then die. a ciritical mass of stalkers will be required to 1 shot cyclone to stop this pattern. this number is crucial. right now i'd say this is 'too many'. 1 would obviously be 'too few'. because it seems this unit is based around stalkers, the slower, shorter range zealots and sentries are completely worthless vs the cyclone (except maybe a FF to lock it in your base?) the issues for toss around this unit are that it's fast, so it can move across map and harass early int he game. if toss don't invest in X numbers of stalkers they are just dead. literally. build order loss. it's possible toss can hold off cyclone with early phoenix. I don't know how this will work in reality since if the terran sends a few marines and continues to make cyclones i think they will just kill the phoenix. grav beam has range 4, so all cyclones will lockon to phoenix. i don't think toss would ahve time to build pylon, gateway, cybercore, robo, robo bay, colossus + colossus range before cyclone arrive at protoss base. note : not sure if range is required. maybe with enoguh ground forces / nexus cannon the cyclone could be kept back?) vs the supply depot, barracks, techlab + factory, lift factory onto techlab (assuming fastest build orders for both) + travel time. Since immortals are useless vs cyclone (too slow, no hardend shields) toss should either go stargate or blink. Am i missing anything yet? Your stuck on the stalker speed--like I said, that's just a stat attribute. Its a ground unit designed to move and shoot, but be able to extend its range once it "commits/locks on" to a target. This means they want this unit to be able to kite, but before it can kite anything it has to get within range and fight close range long enough to lock on. Main attributes to look at: speed (kite effectiveness) lock on time (how long should it be vulnerable) DPS potential (do we want this to kite targets for a long time or only a short time) These are all arbitrary. They could make it slightly faster than zealots and have stalkers be their hard counter. They could make them have high damage and speed to counter stalkers, but a long lock on timer so they're hard countered by zealots. etc... The stats themselves are arbitrary and changes what units they are good against. But what we should discuss is "what aspect of mech is fixed/improved by unit like this." and then focus its stats on fixing that weakness. We can't discuss what aspect of Mech is improved with this when we assume that the unit stats change massively. You can't say this is a good unit early for pokes against Protoss while allowing the assumption that a stalker can kill it, since then a single stalker shuts it down. Stats and design are connected. You give a unit stats so that it can fullfill a purpose. That is called designing a unit. Whether the cyclone has 36, 40 or 30dps doesn't greatly alter its design, but when you alter its stats so that stalkers just outrun them when the original purpose was the other way around then it is a redesign. See, you're not getting it. Their design has nothing to do with the stalker. You can design them to be the kite of ANYTHING, right now their speed is made similar to stalkers. But they could be slowed down so that they're meant to kite roaches, or sped up and made to kite phoenixes. What is important is we talk about what units does a mech army want to kite in the first place. What is important is talking about how much of the power of the unit is frontloaded (comes fully functional) or backloaded (needs late game upgrades). Getting stuck talking about stalkers is the opposite of talking about the Cyclone. The stalker is just an example. Let me put it this way: If you give a unit 100range you still don't know if this is a longrange unit by design or a shortrange unit. Only if you know that the range of all other starcraft units is in between 0.25 to 15 you will realize that this is by far the biggest artillery in the game. Same goes for the discussion about any unit in the game. Only when you compare the cyclone to stalkers/roaches/hydras/marines/marauders/immortals you can make conclusions about its design. It's current design is that it can kite all of those units (and many more) without being touched at all, while it is basically defenselss against something like speed-zerglings because they just run up and surround and that's it for the cyclone.
I guess Cyclone could have a role as a mobile form of mech-harassment which is better vs armored units/static defense than the Hellion. So late game you run around with Hellions and Cyclones and harass the enemy. In order to accomplish that effectively, it would benefit from a faster movement speed but shorter lockdown range.
But if this works well, it could definitely add a lot of charm to mech-play. Especially combined with higher warp-in time as mech then will be able to harass protoss bases.
The biggest problem for mech-play (in a world with out hardened shield, Ravens and Swarm Hosts) is its lack of offensive options in the midgame. Mech is probably the most fun against terran as bio heavy play has a harder time shutting down Hellbat and hellion harass + mech easier can make timing attacks in tvt. So if the Cyclone can make mech-play better in the midgame, I am looking very much forward to it.
I actually think lurkers will be primarily used with roach/hydra/ravager armies.
If you don't go for roaches you still will need some banelings, thus i don't see a real problem with the lurker being slower than stimmed bio.
But this is pretty theoretical, cause we don't really know how hercs will influence bio vs zerg rigth now :
Sure this style could work great as well. I don't see any downside to allowing as many different/unique styles as possible. As much as I enjoy 4M vs Muta/bling, it definitely gets tiresome to see the some unit compositions battle it out against each other over and over.
|
On November 11 2014 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:58 Hider wrote:On November 11 2014 00:55 The_Red_Viper wrote:On November 11 2014 00:53 Hider wrote:On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio. Yeh, that's actually true. I think the interaction will suck vs bio units if Lurkers can't really be out on the map and escape safely. Should definitely be up to 3.3 or something like that. Then ofc Immortals also just needs to more mobile as well so protoss has slightly better opportunities of escaping from an engagement. I don't know what purpose the current 2.25 movement speed serves. BW had no banelings. I don't think the zerg won't build ANY banelings just cause he has the lurker now. I think the Lurker should be designed around offering a different style/different options to zerg. E.g. if we could have both 4M vs Muta/bling and Lurker/muta/ling vs tank/marine/medivac/raven it would be really cool. Sure you could mix some Lurkers and Banelings together and you will likely opt for that in the lategame. But at least in the midgame I like to zerg having the options of these very distinctive styles and therefore it is important that the Lurker has a fun interaction against these bio units. With Collosus at 8 range, I think Lurker range (with upgrade) could be 8 as well, but with faster movement speed. I actually think lurkers will be primarily used with roach/hydra/ravager armies. If you don't go for roaches you still will need some banelings, thus i don't see a real problem with the lurker being slower than stimmed bio. But this is pretty theoretical, cause we don't really know how hercs will influence bio vs zerg rigth now
In theory, lings + lurkers should work well.
Its a fun combo btw.
|
Is it just me or do they seem like they have no idea what they're doing AT ALL with Protoss?
They're responding to community pressure (despite the fact that Protoss is currently weak):
-Immortal losing its hardened shield
-Units take twice as long to warp in and take 200% damage while doing so
-Tempests can no longer shoot up
-Colossus range nerfed to 8 after the upgrade
-Time Warp nerfed to start small and then expand over time (making it much easier to dodge)
-Super roach unit can now break forcefields
-Photon Overcharge doesn't shoot up
But at the same time, what are they adding to Protoss?
-The disruptor, an AoE 'crowd control type unit' which is very easily dodged by right clicking away from i (as we saw in the games played)
-Stasis bomb for the Oracle, an AoE effect useful in big fights
Protoss has always had great AoE options. It does not need MORE AoE. What it needs is a good fighting unit that has some microability. Something that doesn't need to be supported by AoE to be effective....
And then, Blizzard completely blanked on a 2nd new unit. As in, they only introduced one new unit for Protoss because they literally have no fucking idea what they're doing.
Is it just me or do people sense some serious Protoss hate in this expansion? As a Protoss player I can't help but feel that I have nothing to be excited about.
|
@ Protoss
I think there is no doubt that Blizzard will focus mostly on protoss between alpha and beta release.
Right now, I really dislike that they added two more AOE-abilities/units to the race. Stasis field-trap looks really boring on the Oracle and the Disruptor kinda creates the same micro-response as Psy Storm (you split).
I don't understand why Blizzard isn't willing to make larger changes the mobility of the Immortal if they are going to redesign it anyway. Especially if they force players to take more bases, then the protoss composition needs to be alot better in a "straight" up open engagement + more mobile.
And why are they so unwilling to change the Collosus further? Noone really like this unit as it is right now.
Is it just me or do people sense some serious Protoss hate in this expansion? As a Protoss player I can't help but feel that I have nothing to be excited about.
I guess you can look forward to more warp-prism micro, but that's kinda the only thing. I will also argue that there is a much more elegant solution to promoting more Warp prism play with the following 2 changes:
(1) Allow Immortal to attack instantly after being dropped of and increase its range to 7 with faster movement speed (balance it based on this).
(2) Balance the Collosus based on it not being targetable by AA units, so terran/zerg players don't get Viking/Corrupter to counter it. This will open up for more Collosus drop micro or just warp prism play in general since it's less likely that AA units will be out on the map.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Agree with DinoMight. As a protoss that doesn't use AoE (you read that right), I'm not particularly happy with the direction units are going.
|
On November 11 2014 00:50 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 00:47 Hider wrote:Wow Lurker gets 2.95 movement for now? Isn't that stalker speed kinda fast for a siege type unit? Same as BW. It adds a lot more counterbased micro when you can unburrow and escape when the enemy is attacking you. If anything, I would almost argue that it needs to be even faster in Sc2 since the overall mobility of the game is higher. Lurker was as fast as stim bio in broodwar. 2.95 speed means they are around 0,4 slower than stimmed bio.
never forget the on creep bonus. But the Lurker has to be fast because with setup time and low range its really easy to outposition it. Wonder if the Lurker will destroy bio so heavily in the end that mech will be the only option.
Still meh. Zergs get its Colossus back and Toss gets a super Baneling. Not sure how Bio wants to fight the Protoss deathball while splitting away from the Disruptor. Not sure if the Herc can keep Bio viable. I mean the rework Terran gets is awesome and only some slight Viking groundmode rework is missing to make it perfect. But they still lack those controlled mass destruction weaponry and Terran should be the ones that have em or have counters to it atleast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
