|
On November 12 2014 04:49 Superbanana wrote:Tricky, i like the banshee speed upgrade but not default cloak, like combined revelation and envision but not stasis ward... And i support economic changes, but not exactly as it is right now :/
Sorry, I thought about splitting those up, but the list felt long enough as it was.
If I ever make another poll like this, I'll take that into consideration.
Along with probably adding a larger scale of options rather than a binary one.
|
I don't like the changes to the corrupter. I think the corrupter should stay the same as is but also give it an ability to sacrifice itself as a zerg drop pod.
Corrupters look exactly like zerg drop ships anyway and add value to the corrupter when all air targets are finished. It will also compliment the sc2 3D engine.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jRFzpRQ.jpg)
|
With proxy gates etc basically removed, could we invert the warpgate / gateway production time dynamic so that gateways produce units faster than warp gates?
|
On November 12 2014 08:27 Kharnage wrote:
With proxy gates etc basically removed, could we invert the warpgate / gateway production time dynamic so that gateways produce units faster than warp gates?
Warpgates get nerfed anyways, no need to turn them useless.
|
On November 12 2014 08:30 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 08:27 Kharnage wrote:
With proxy gates etc basically removed, could we invert the warpgate / gateway production time dynamic so that gateways produce units faster than warp gates? Warpgates get nerfed anyways, no need to turn them useless.
or rather, make gateways produce at the same rate as warpgates. it's a buff to gateway since proxy gate is removed.
warp gate would still have advantages once the game spreads out over multiple bases
not only this but it would make warpgate optional in the early game, instead of 'the thing you must do with your first 50 gas'
|
On November 12 2014 04:40 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 04:29 TheDwf wrote:That feel when you search which box to check after you reread the list 2 times Are you telling me you don't like any of the changes? Not even the Ravager or the Lurker? Or the new SH? Or the new Immortal ability? Or am I missing something here?
Ah yes, the Lurker. Honestly I focused more on the specific changes than the vague skeletons of units they showcased, obviously at this point anything could be reworked into something OK.
What I like with the Ravager is the ability to salvage Roaches into something more useful, considering the unit is intrinsically limited by the power of larva inject—and with good reasons naturally. But this should be questioned in the first place. Larva inject results in excessive surges of production, which in turn forces tier1 and tier2 Zerg ground units to have limited efficiency on the long run, which leads to the need for the free units + static defence system (Spines/Broods/infests, SHosts in HotS) to hold all gas-heavy armies (Protoss, mech) past 15 minutes; or tech switches that, again, rely on the strength of the larva mechanic and suddenly create a composition mistake for the opponent (but it can't be done forever). They should rather balance the game around less larvae in exchange for improved units. Well, they should actually tone down the mass production system for all races, but it could also be done by slowing down the economy.
I don't see much reason to be enthusiast for the new SH. First what is it exactly? A siege unit? With the introduction of the Lurker (assuming it ends up with 7-9 range) and the existence of the Brood lord (indirectly overnerfed in HotS, but it can be solved easily), Zerg already has siege units. Is it for harassment? How would it work with the increased time they want to implement between Locust waves? You pay for the unit, launch your Locusts then die to some attack because you have X supply of sitting ducks? Can't really tell without knowing what they exactly intend to do, but so far I am not thrilled. In the end the SH might not be needed at all, especially with its problematic Locust mechanic.
As for the Immortal change… Is it really as bad as it's written? You press one button and it turns the unit invulnerable for a few seconds? What is this… You can't create stuff like that when "smart" casting exists. It's too easy to use for the strength of the effect. It should come with a drawback or some mechanical difficulty. Currently it seems it has none. Also why would the opponent be prevented from targeting a key unit? Immortals are targets of choice for Terran/Zerg. Even Protoss focus them whenever they have the opportunity in the early game with Blink Stalkers. Why would you be allowed to be immune to any mispositioning for a few seconds with a single button? Why do they keep giving this unit the ability to recklessly charge into Siege Tanks? Why this obsession with "breaking Tank lines" when they're not even strong in the match-up (TvP) to begin with? Look at how Terrans engage Tank lines in TvT. They use some of their infantry as decoy for the first few shots. Zergs can do the same with Roaches. Protoss have units to do the same, they don't need an automation of the function.
What purpose does it serve to have this unit as a 4 supply, anti-Armored juggernaut produced from the robo rather than a 2 supply weaker variant produced from the Gateway? 3 Immortals = 2 minutes of robo production time with a few chronos. 6 Dragoons = one round of gate production time. Which ones are you going to detach from your army? 3 Immortals which are easily overwhelmed by hords of cheaper units and represent very precious robo production time, or 6 Dragoons that are easily reproducible and not needed to hug your Sentries under your Colossi to have the ultimate 1a army at 16-18 minutes? The choice is swiftly made. They should remove the Immortal in its current form and put it into the Gateway as a 2 supply, 80/100 shields/hps, 40 sec production time, 10 + 15 vs Armored or something like that. No Hardened Shields, no 1 key godmode button. Didn't StarBow do this at some point? A non-warpable Dragoon on top of the existing Blink Stalker? This seems so much better than having the current deathball robo duo as a forced extra firepower (with the third uninteresting possibility of Voids in PvZ) because Stalkers obviously cannot fulfill forever the role of a ranged damage dealer with Warpgate/Blink.
|
giving the corruptor some kind of kamikaze ability would be kind of cool and zergy. for instance if it could explode and spawn a few scourge/bombs that last for a few seconds and require the zerg to micro them really quickly.
|
On November 11 2014 05:21 Foxxan wrote:
Just thought about something really cool. About that archon mode.
Why cant this become the competetive aspect? Imagine the moves that we would see as viewers.
Its like a big teamwork but with 1team.
Imagine archonmode but 3ppl in the same team?
PVT
Rain, zest, partin vs maru, innovation, flash
Their mechanics together.
Something else. Imagine a RTS designed with archon mode in mind.
Wow? The moves, the tactics.
I don't think you'd need more than 2 on a team. 3 is just impractical, I think.
I can imagine proleague adding this, and that would be quite fun to see.
|
On November 12 2014 08:50 meenamjah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2014 05:21 Foxxan wrote:
Just thought about something really cool. About that archon mode.
Why cant this become the competetive aspect? Imagine the moves that we would see as viewers.
Its like a big teamwork but with 1team.
Imagine archonmode but 3ppl in the same team?
PVT
Rain, zest, partin vs maru, innovation, flash
Their mechanics together.
Something else. Imagine a RTS designed with archon mode in mind.
Wow? The moves, the tactics. I don't think you'd need more than 2 on a team. 3 is just impractical, I think. I can imagine proleague adding this, and that would be quite fun to see.
I think the main thing preventing this from being fun to watch is that there's no real way to personify or appreciate each player's individual presence in the game. For instance, you lose the bits of personality that each player brings to the table (who did what micro move? whose idea was it to think up that cool tactic on the fly? etc.)
|
On November 12 2014 07:11 GDI wrote:
I don't like the changes to the corrupter. I think the corrupter should stay the same as is but also give it an ability to sacrifice itself as a zerg drop pod.
Corrupters look exactly like zerg drop ships anyway and add value to the corrupter when all air targets are finished. It will also compliment the sc2 3D engine.
this is a cool idea, but speaking as a protoss the problem is still that there is no punishment for overmaking corruptors vs colossus. Zerg could make 25 corruptors, totally wreck the few colossus on the field and then suicide all the corruptors into ground army.
|
On November 12 2014 08:59 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 07:11 GDI wrote:
I don't like the changes to the corrupter. I think the corrupter should stay the same as is but also give it an ability to sacrifice itself as a zerg drop pod.
Corrupters look exactly like zerg drop ships anyway and add value to the corrupter when all air targets are finished. It will also compliment the sc2 3D engine.
this is a cool idea, but speaking as a protoss the problem is still that there is no punishment for overmaking corruptors vs colossus. Zerg could make 25 corruptors, totally wreck the few colossus on the field and then suicide all the corruptors into ground army.
I suspect that giving other utility to an anti air specialist unit is the intention, just like landed vikings.
But i dislike the idea that you must sacrifice it. It breaks information about army composition. With broodlords you can at least scout the greater spire or the cocoon.
Im also not a big fan of an ability that involves not moving your unit... there are other ways to give utility to corruptors. Some ability that require more than spam on everything in range (corruption), or click and do something else while you wait (caustic barf) .
Even keeping them as they are right now is fine, no matter how silly corruption is. If the unit is going to change, it must be an improvement in terms of design :/
|
They should remove the Immortal in its current form and put it into the Gateway as a 2 supply, 80/100 shields/hps, 40 sec production time, 10 + 15 vs Armored or something like that. No Hardened Shields, no 1 key godmode button. Didn't StarBow do this at some point? A non-warpable Dragoon on top of the existing Blink Stalker? This seems so much better than having the current deathball robo duo as a forced extra firepower (with the third uninteresting possibility of Voids in PvZ) because Stalkers obviously cannot fulfill forever the role of a ranged damage dealer with Warpgate/Blink.
It's not a very intuitive solution to have a unit that is non-warpinable at the warpgate. As cool as the idea may sound in theory, it was never well-liked by Starbow players.
But I believe you actually get a very similar effect by (a) reducing the cost of the Robotics Facility to around 150/50 and (b) Make the Immortal somewhat more similar to the Dragoon in terms of mobility, so it doesn't need to press a button to be "microable".
This way it will be easier to build more Immortals, and therefore the protoss composition won't be as reliant upon the "gimmicky" warpgate units.
|
On November 12 2014 09:09 Superbanana wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 08:59 Kharnage wrote:On November 12 2014 07:11 GDI wrote:
I don't like the changes to the corrupter. I think the corrupter should stay the same as is but also give it an ability to sacrifice itself as a zerg drop pod.
Corrupters look exactly like zerg drop ships anyway and add value to the corrupter when all air targets are finished. It will also compliment the sc2 3D engine.
this is a cool idea, but speaking as a protoss the problem is still that there is no punishment for overmaking corruptors vs colossus. Zerg could make 25 corruptors, totally wreck the few colossus on the field and then suicide all the corruptors into ground army. I suspect that giving other utility to an anti air specialist unit is the intention, just like landed vikings. But i dislike the idea that you must sacrifice it. It breaks information about army composition. With broodlords you can at least scout the greater spire or the cocoon. Im also not a big fan of an ability that involves not moving your unit... there are other ways to give utility to corruptors. Some ability that require more than spam on everything in range (corruption), or click and do something else while you wait (caustic barf) . Even keeping them as they are right now is fine, no matter how silly corruption is. If the unit is going to change, it must be an impovement in terms of design :/
Personally I don't think corruptors should get any utility vs ground unless they also get a nerf in terms of durability.They are incredibly tough. Phoenix do basically nothing to them, they laugh at storms. Trying to kill them with stalkers is kind of pathetic. The only thing a big ball of corruptors has to worry about is flying over an archon or voidrays when the 'micro' button is pressed.
Due to this the only downside to making a lot of corruptors is that after they have killed everything that flys they are dead weight.
|
On November 12 2014 08:55 Erik.TheRed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 08:50 meenamjah wrote:On November 11 2014 05:21 Foxxan wrote:
Just thought about something really cool. About that archon mode.
Why cant this become the competetive aspect? Imagine the moves that we would see as viewers.
Its like a big teamwork but with 1team.
Imagine archonmode but 3ppl in the same team?
PVT
Rain, zest, partin vs maru, innovation, flash
Their mechanics together.
Something else. Imagine a RTS designed with archon mode in mind.
Wow? The moves, the tactics. I don't think you'd need more than 2 on a team. 3 is just impractical, I think. I can imagine proleague adding this, and that would be quite fun to see. I think the main thing preventing this from being fun to watch is that there's no real way to personify or appreciate each player's individual presence in the game. For instance, you lose the bits of personality that each player brings to the table (who did what micro move? whose idea was it to think up that cool tactic on the fly? etc.)
it could work
UI shows the name of the player controlling what unit
for example Polt is controlling 3 cyclones, the viewers would see a small usertag "Polt" over Polt's currently selected units
Jaedong has selected the orbital comand, viewers would see a small usertag "Jaedong" over his currently selected unit
|
When I first saw the Disruptor I thought it was basically a Scarab without the Reaver. I realize now that I don't understand it at all.
It's so slow. The invincibility lasts so long (it has to because it's so slow). They need to make that unit way faster (maybe immobilize before it detonates or something to give you a chance to run). Hell, maybe just make it invincible anytime it's moving and it has to stop to detonate. Maybe they can keep it the way it is now, but give it a much larger speed boost while it's invincible.
But it should like zip around like the Oracle. Then it would be way more exciting. I don't even understand how the unit is supposed to work the way it is right now. No wonder the Protoss are bitching.
|
On November 12 2014 08:55 Erik.TheRed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2014 08:50 meenamjah wrote:On November 11 2014 05:21 Foxxan wrote:
Just thought about something really cool. About that archon mode.
Why cant this become the competetive aspect? Imagine the moves that we would see as viewers.
Its like a big teamwork but with 1team.
Imagine archonmode but 3ppl in the same team?
PVT
Rain, zest, partin vs maru, innovation, flash
Their mechanics together.
Something else. Imagine a RTS designed with archon mode in mind.
Wow? The moves, the tactics. I don't think you'd need more than 2 on a team. 3 is just impractical, I think. I can imagine proleague adding this, and that would be quite fun to see. I think the main thing preventing this from being fun to watch is that there's no real way to personify or appreciate each player's individual presence in the game. For instance, you lose the bits of personality that each player brings to the table (who did what micro move? whose idea was it to think up that cool tactic on the fly? etc.)
In wol, nope
In hots, nope
But in lotv i can see this beeing really fun and easy to appreciate the micro from all races.
If they make lotv good that is.
|
Russian Federation3329 Posts
So many changes... :o I guess a game like BW will never exist again huh?
Did BW bring any changes to existing units? if it didn't, how the heck was it so balanced almost first go?
*mind blown*
|
On November 12 2014 07:11 GDI wrote:
I don't like the changes to the corrupter. I think the corrupter should stay the same as is but also give it an ability to sacrifice itself as a zerg drop pod.
Corrupters look exactly like zerg drop ships anyway and add value to the corrupter when all air targets are finished. It will also compliment the sc2 3D engine.
Lol I had the same idea today, didn't think they'd look so similar.
So many changes... :o I guess a game like BW will never exist again huh?
Did BW bring any changes to existing units? if it didn't, how the heck was it so balanced almost first go?
*mind blown*
BW was almost a complete overhaul, especially the Air units.
As for the Immortal change… Is it really as bad as it's written? You press one button and it turns the unit invulnerable for a few seconds? What is this… You can't create stuff like that when "smart" casting exists. It's too easy to use for the strength of the effect. It should come with a drawback or some mechanical difficulty. Currently it seems it has none. Also why would the opponent be prevented from targeting a key unit? Immortals are targets of choice for Terran/Zerg. Even Protoss focus them whenever they have the opportunity in the early game with Blink Stalkers. Why would you be allowed to be immune to any mispositioning for a few seconds with a single button? Why do they keep giving this unit the ability to recklessly charge into Siege Tanks? Why this obsession with "breaking Tank lines" when they're not even strong in the match-up (TvP) to begin with? Look at how Terrans engage Tank lines in TvT. They use some of their infantry as decoy for the first few shots. Zergs can do the same with Roaches. Protoss have units to do the same, they don't need an automation of the function.
The entire concept for the Immortal lies in it's name. Now you can press a button and for 4 seconds it truly is Immortal.
|
On November 12 2014 10:30 ejozl wrote:
The entire concept for the Immortal lies in it's name. Now you can press a button and for 4 seconds it truly is Immortal.
unless I'm mistaken, the immortal shield ability has around 250 hp so it's not completely invulnerable
|
On November 12 2014 10:25 Bisu-Fan wrote:
So many changes... :o I guess a game like BW will never exist again huh?
Did BW bring any changes to existing units? if it didn't, how the heck was it so balanced almost first go?
*mind blown*
Your mind got blown by the mere possibility of you being right? Should have checked Liquipedia first. Patch 1.04. Would have saved yourself a premature mind-blowulation over an idealized SC1 that never existed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
