On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Does the mouse scroll trick still work in SC2? Might work well with corrosive bile.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
It costs extra supply so it might not be a better roach. Just because it still has similar strengths and weaknesses as a roach it does not mean it is a better roach. Roach has a different role than a ravager. You will not be doing early timing busts with mass ravagers like you can with roaches.
The ravager is not only a better Roach. Even if it is true that it has better range, health, DPS and base speed than a Roach, and straight fighting control is basically the same.However, the Ravager has not the assault functionality of the Roach, having burrow movement (Stealth) and fast health regeneration (skirmisher). The ravager is more something like a moving siege unit, able to cast a mortar skillshot on the move.
If you considerate that, the Roach is a plain fighting unit that scalates into an skirmisher/assault unit.It is not able to stand well against antiarmored compositions (MMM, heavy mech/tanklines, well microed Zealot/Stalker/sentry, Stalker/sentry/immortal, Void ray/chargelot.The ravager is a frontal charge unit with siege breaking functionality. If you have observed closely, it is designed to crreate oportunities in situations where Roaches couldn't work. I think that with reasonable costs and balance, it could be a good addition, specially against MMM, Soultrains and ZvZ roach wars. It's not that difficult: regulate cost and tech requirements, and control ability usage.
IMAO, design-wise it is something like the hellbat: it adds optional functionality to a unit that in most cases is very straight and has many counters, but loosing their main strengths (in this case, burrow micro and regeneration) in the process of overcoming its previous counters. Roaches are quite dispensable, reheal very well when upgraded and have stealth possibilities. The ravager loses that traits (specially being dispensable) for firepower. So no, it's not simply a better roach. Basic stats aren't everything.
By the way, manual charge and reviewing Charge/ Concussive shells interaction is IMAO far much more interesting for the game than making the dual attack marauder. Otherwise, you are simply motivating the addition of sentries in the deathball. Drops will stay 99% the same, the tactic of pressuring/gaining upgrade advantage will be strict meta for terran, and lategame will be more protoss favoured. As a protoss I like the marauder dual-attack because I will be able to pressure much more with some sentries and All-ins are going to be simply crazy, but in terms of design, the interactions between the Protoss ball and the MMM ball are going to remain the same, now simply more protoss favored in terms of damage reduction. Reviewing the efficiency of kiting vs charge and maybe applying a slight nerf over the vs armored damage of the marauder is maybe a better way, specially with ultralisk armor buff incoming. Just do numbers or test the LotV custom mod.
If we don't review the basic interactions and the way units really work, what we are doing is just playing with math in most cases. Just like some governements do.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
They're not exactly free either
weeeeellll... these spam-click abilities like ITs and snipes haven't hindered players from massing such units yet. And compared to those, corrosive bile is like slowly slurping a margarita on a sunny beach.
And they aren't free, but how many you can morph will depend a lot on the end stats of that unit. Two comparisons:
Ravager(Roach) 165HP (+20) 12.31dps (+4.31) 6 range (+2) + corrosive bile ability tech costs 200/0 (-100/100 for roach speed)
Ravager(Hydralisk) 165HP (+85) 6 range (+1/+0 after hydralisk range) 1armor (+1) + corrosive bile ability tech costs 200/0 (-100/250 for the hydra upgrade+hydra den)
So I don't think it is unrealistic that a Zerg will just eventually start to morph all his roaches into ravagers instead of going hydralisks with the current stats. The ravager right now on its own is like the roach+hydra combination, a little heavier on the unit costs, a little lighter on the tech costs and with a siege/splash option built in. I think roach+ravager is way more realistic than roach+hydra. And the ultimate goal of that army is probably like pure ravager as the backbone. (a lot of that will have to be determined by how much Zerg needs antiair)
sounds like current TvZ to me, turn as much lings into banelings as possible, because they are more supply efficient. I guess I heard it wrong when they said that the Ravager does less damage then a Roach but has more range. But with the additional 1 supply it is true in a way. Siege tanks suck since their damage nerf because they are 3 supply. And there is so much that does more damage at less supply.
weeeeellll... these spam-click abilities like ITs and snipes haven't hindered players from massing such units yet. And compared to those, corrosive bile is like slowly slurping a margarita on a sunny beach.
Big difference between IT and Ravagers ability. WIth the former, precision really doesn't matter + it's only over a short time period where you can use them. With the Ravager, the CD is really low, so it's not practical to ever have more than 15-20 at once.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
Have to agree here. The ravager is a MUCH better roach actually. The supply cost is not really tragic until you are near maxed supply. And when maxed it will still be a better roach simply because of the ridiculous aoe damage you can infilct. And the ability to hit air. Try playing the custom mod. I don't know if the CD is correct there, but aside from the mineral/gas cost, there is no reason you would ever have roach not turned into a ravager.
I also think that zerg is getting too many high supply units. If the ravager was still 2 supply but had no attack or a weak attack it would still be worth it and fulfill its role as siege and anti deathball unit.
weeeeellll... these spam-click abilities like ITs and snipes haven't hindered players from massing such units yet. And compared to those, corrosive bile is like slowly slurping a margarita on a sunny beach.
Big difference between IT and Ravagers ability. WIth the former, precision really doesn't matter + it's only over a short time period where you can use them. With the Ravager, the CD is really low, so it's not practical to ever have more than 15-20 at once.
I'm just testing this and with 30ravagers I'm can reach the limit (hence I can put all of them on cooldown). And that is just with spamming the ability, not with something like rapid fire hotkey trick. (watch the warp in at 1:20 seconds in the video below).
And the 60splash is quite a lot on top of the normal 1.5times dps of the roach that is going of meanwhile. You really don't need to hit often to make that efficient I think (also just making opponents run while your 6range units get a shot of isn't that bad.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
Have to agree here. The ravager is a MUCH better roach actually. The supply cost is not really tragic until you are near maxed supply. And when maxed it will still be a better roach simply because of the ridiculous aoe damage you can infilct. And the ability to hit air. Try playing the custom mod. I don't know if the CD is correct there, but aside from the mineral/gas cost, there is no reason you would ever have roach not turned into a ravager.
I also think that zerg is getting too many high supply units. If the ravager was still 2 supply but had no attack or a weak attack it would still be worth it and fulfill its role as siege and anti deathball unit.
I don't know if units with aoe attacks should be supply efficient because they are already strong in high numbers. -- Also, the ability does 60dmg, but in the mod it was 40+40 to armored, which is super powerful vs stationary targets.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
Have to agree here. The ravager is a MUCH better roach actually. The supply cost is not really tragic until you are near maxed supply. And when maxed it will still be a better roach simply because of the ridiculous aoe damage you can infilct. And the ability to hit air. Try playing the custom mod. I don't know if the CD is correct there, but aside from the mineral/gas cost, there is no reason you would ever have roach not turned into a ravager.
I also think that zerg is getting too many high supply units. If the ravager was still 2 supply but had no attack or a weak attack it would still be worth it and fulfill its role as siege and anti deathball unit.
I don't know if units with aoe attacks should be supply efficient because they are already strong in high numbers. -- Also, the ability does 60dmg, but in the mod it was 40+40 to armored, which is super powerful vs stationary targets.
You are right, maybe. There are different ways to go about balancing the ravager, but more supply is not a good way. They could hav no attack and a higher CD. Or be changed to be very vulnerable with no armor and less HP. Now they are basically a zerg version of an HT only with huge hp and high attack.
Or you could leave them as is and add a really long cooldown.
On December 01 2014 22:47 Grumbels wrote: The ravager is very strong in large numbers since the shots become harder to avoid. The ravager is also strong in multiple smaller groups because it takes more attention to avoid the shots than to cast them. This strongly reminds me of the old fungal which could shut down both large and small armies. However, if you neuter corrosive bile the ravager becomes less well defined, more like a pseudo roach. Is it possible to find a good balance here?
One thing that I believe could be tweaked with the Ravager is the cooldown of its ability. In my opinion it should feel like a significant reward for dodging an ability/spell. That's what it feels like when you play vs Storms (too an extent at least) due to the 75 mana cost. But with only 10 second CD, I think battles will be just way too focussed on constantly trying to dodge them, and zergs constantly spamming that F key. Thus, I would opt for a somewhat higher CD of at least 15 seconds.
The ability itself is nice (even though i think it is way too spammable right now), but why do we get a "better roach" when evolving a roach? I like that zerg has multiple units which can evolve, but every other unit so far didn't evolve into a better version of itself, it always was a totally new unit concept.
This concept fits the Roach perfectly as the Ravager here helps offset the disadvantages of the Roach. I would argue that the Ravager concept is the best idea since the Medivac was introduced...
Yeah i don't agree at all. The Ravager is a better roach, why would anyone ever WANT to build roaches now? Sure he might need to cause of money, but there really is no active decision involved now, the ravager is simply better. I don't see how that is good design tbh. I also don't like the medivac at all, but that is another topic
If you have 30+ Roaches, I don't think you are gonna turn all of them into Ravagers. They do not scale that well due to the fact that you need to cast each "bomb".
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the fact that a ravager is a better roach. A baneling isn't a better zergling A lurker isn't a better hydra A broodlord isn't a better corruptor But a ravager is just that, a better roach :/ I don't really disagree that the ability is a nice idea, but the rest is lazy design imo
There should be an upgrade for the ultralisk so that it can turn into a brutalisk. :p
Anyway, about the corrosive bile cooldown: the cooldown for blink is at 10 seconds too. It's possible that this is the default value Blizzard likes for these sort of abilities. What's the cooldown for the herc's grapple hook?
The stats about the Ravager ability are simply OP. AOE, 60 damage, breaking forcefields, 10 seconds cooldown, no cost. The unit itself is fine. I would make it energy + very low cooldown based to be competitive but allowing some counters (Ghosts, Templars).
About the unit itself, it's in the line of supply efficiency of the roach, and the cost is much higher (at least double the cost) so there shouldn't be a problem at all in terms of meta. Roaches diserve some love too, not dying so easily and dealing a bit more damage. A ravager costs like 2 roaches, takes 1 more supply, has around 25% more health and 50% more damage and range (6). And it has not the health regeneration of the roach. At best, it's 1.5 roaches. The mortar aoe is what makes it wwwaaaaaay strong. Remove the ability damage/ AoE and watch its huge strength disappear.
BTW, you lose the AA efficiency of the Hydralisk and you are losing the possiblity of going Lurkers if you think about mass Ravager, and also burrow micro/burrow healing from the roach. I don't really see any OP or big advantage other than the Corrosive bile ability stats. It's simple to balance.
Again, the unit is fine, the ability is GOD. Apply brain, and balance comes. We'll have to trust Blizz brains u.u
Look, if they want to make a large number of ravager not so OP, just remove the skill shot's damage to air units, so you have to build hydras, which will slow you down.
On December 02 2014 01:01 JCoto wrote: I'm with most of you.
The ravager is not only a better Roach. Even if it is true that it has better range, health, DPS and base speed than a Roach, and straight fighting control is basically the same.However, the Ravager has not the assault functionality of the Roach, having burrow movement (Stealth) and fast health regeneration (skirmisher). The ravager is more something like a moving siege unit, able to cast a mortar skillshot on the move.
If you considerate that, the Roach is a plain fighting unit that scalates into an skirmisher/assault unit.It is not able to stand well against antiarmored compositions (MMM, heavy mech/tanklines, well microed Zealot/Stalker/sentry, Stalker/sentry/immortal, Void ray/chargelot.The ravager is a frontal charge unit with siege breaking functionality. If you have observed closely, it is designed to crreate oportunities in situations where Roaches couldn't work. I think that with reasonable costs and balance, it could be a good addition, specially against MMM, Soultrains and ZvZ roach wars. It's not that difficult: regulate cost and tech requirements, and control ability usage.
IMAO, design-wise it is something like the hellbat: it adds optional functionality to a unit that in most cases is very straight and has many counters, but loosing their main strengths (in this case, burrow micro and regeneration) in the process of overcoming its previous counters. Roaches are quite dispensable, reheal very well when upgraded and have stealth possibilities. The ravager loses that traits (specially being dispensable) for firepower. So no, it's not simply a better roach. Basic stats aren't everything.
By the way, manual charge and reviewing Charge/ Concussive shells interaction is IMAO far much more interesting for the game than making the dual attack marauder. Otherwise, you are simply motivating the addition of sentries in the deathball. Drops will stay 99% the same, the tactic of pressuring/gaining upgrade advantage will be strict meta for terran, and lategame will be more protoss favoured. As a protoss I like the marauder dual-attack because I will be able to pressure much more with some sentries and All-ins are going to be simply crazy, but in terms of design, the interactions between the Protoss ball and the MMM ball are going to remain the same, now simply more protoss favored in terms of damage reduction. Reviewing the efficiency of kiting vs charge and maybe applying a slight nerf over the vs armored damage of the marauder is maybe a better way, specially with ultralisk armor buff incoming. Just do numbers or test the LotV custom mod.
If we don't review the basic interactions and the way units really work, what we are doing is just playing with math in most cases. Just like some governements do.
I agree especially with that last sentence. It sums up nicely how numbers in raw fighting efficiency are often misleading.
I want to answer on the chargelot issue though. I feel like if blizzard finally manages to lower the efficiency of colossus deathball stacking, they should look at chargelots a little. Currently zealots in general are just a mineral dump or a way to spend money while being low on ressources and high on production + a bunch of early push timings vs Z. I wished there was a way chargelots/zealots could be a bit more usable apart from dropping them into mineral lines. Like they could use a higher base movement speed or sth.
On December 02 2014 01:01 JCoto wrote: I'm with most of you.
The ravager is not only a better Roach. Even if it is true that it has better range, health, DPS and base speed than a Roach, and straight fighting control is basically the same.However, the Ravager has not the assault functionality of the Roach, having burrow movement (Stealth) and fast health regeneration (skirmisher). The ravager is more something like a moving siege unit, able to cast a mortar skillshot on the move.
If you considerate that, the Roach is a plain fighting unit that scalates into an skirmisher/assault unit.It is not able to stand well against antiarmored compositions (MMM, heavy mech/tanklines, well microed Zealot/Stalker/sentry, Stalker/sentry/immortal, Void ray/chargelot.The ravager is a frontal charge unit with siege breaking functionality. If you have observed closely, it is designed to crreate oportunities in situations where Roaches couldn't work. I think that with reasonable costs and balance, it could be a good addition, specially against MMM, Soultrains and ZvZ roach wars. It's not that difficult: regulate cost and tech requirements, and control ability usage.
IMAO, design-wise it is something like the hellbat: it adds optional functionality to a unit that in most cases is very straight and has many counters, but loosing their main strengths (in this case, burrow micro and regeneration) in the process of overcoming its previous counters. Roaches are quite dispensable, reheal very well when upgraded and have stealth possibilities. The ravager loses that traits (specially being dispensable) for firepower. So no, it's not simply a better roach. Basic stats aren't everything.
By the way, manual charge and reviewing Charge/ Concussive shells interaction is IMAO far much more interesting for the game than making the dual attack marauder. Otherwise, you are simply motivating the addition of sentries in the deathball. Drops will stay 99% the same, the tactic of pressuring/gaining upgrade advantage will be strict meta for terran, and lategame will be more protoss favoured. As a protoss I like the marauder dual-attack because I will be able to pressure much more with some sentries and All-ins are going to be simply crazy, but in terms of design, the interactions between the Protoss ball and the MMM ball are going to remain the same, now simply more protoss favored in terms of damage reduction. Reviewing the efficiency of kiting vs charge and maybe applying a slight nerf over the vs armored damage of the marauder is maybe a better way, specially with ultralisk armor buff incoming. Just do numbers or test the LotV custom mod.
If we don't review the basic interactions and the way units really work, what we are doing is just playing with math in most cases. Just like some governements do.
I agree especially with that last sentence. It sums up nicely how numbers in raw fighting efficiency are often misleading.
I want to answer on the chargelot issue though. I feel like if blizzard finally manages to lower the efficiency of colossus deathball stacking, they should look at chargelots a little. Currently zealots in general are just a mineral dump or a way to spend money while being low on ressources and high on production + a bunch of early push timings vs Z. I wished there was a way chargelots/zealots could be a bit more usable apart from dropping them into mineral lines. Like they could use a higher base movement speed or sth.
Chargelots/zealots are the shield of toss deathball buying time for stalkers and colossi to deal damage. That is their role. I agree that they deserve a higher base movement speed upon the charge upgrade, but that would only make them die sooner.
EPT
