EPTLegacy of the Void: Multiplayer Development Update - Page 26
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 22 2014 14:39 TedCruz2016 wrote: Swarm host needs to be removed. Not only do tons of free units make it unfair in late game, but swarm host's role kind of overlaps with lurker. They function similarly but accomplish two completely different rolls... | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 22 2014 18:28 TedCruz2016 wrote: Maybe, but spawning locust should have a cost - either energy or minerals. SH turtling is already OP in late game, let alone the new upgrade in LotV that allows locusts to fly across barriers and destroy bases without any cost. The unit is crap but it isn't OP in any way. If anything the unit isn't even strong enough to be a consistend strategy in toplevel Korean play in any matchup (unless it's Zerg vs Mech). | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On December 22 2014 18:28 TedCruz2016 wrote: Maybe, but spawning locust should have a cost - either energy or minerals. SH turtling is already OP in late game, let alone the new upgrade in LotV that allows locusts to fly across barriers and destroy bases without any cost. I don't think that SH turtling is even viable anymore in LotV because: 1) Swarm Hosts cost 100/200 now instead of 200/100. 2) Spawn Locust cooldown is 60 seconds now, while Locusts last for 30 seconds. 3) Spawn Locust isn't on auto-cast anymore(which isn't exactly a big problem, but still it depends from game to game, sometimes it can be). Yes, Locusts are stronger in terms of dps, but their health is same as before, which means that they die to any AoE, but unlike before you don't have a new wave the moment your first wave dies. If you just mass Swarm Hosts, and opponent has enough AoE to push through them, you will just die in 30 seconds window when you don't have Locusts. They are changed, and I am pretty sure that they will mostly be used for harassment, taking down bases with few Swarm Hosts because of the new Locusts or something like that. Players won't mass them anymore since they will take a huge chunk of supply for something that will be able to fight for 30 seconds and then doing absolutely nothing for next 30 seconds. | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
Espers
United Kingdom606 Posts
| ||
|
Alexalder
Italy5 Posts
What do you think? | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
On December 22 2014 23:23 Espers wrote: I don't see why you'd ever use Swarm Hosts over Mutalisks in this "harass" role. 1. Higher DPS 2. Ground attack (turrets and spores would be useless) 3. Unpredictable (compared to mutas, your opponents will immediately know what you're up to when your spire is detected) 4. No resource cost. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On December 22 2014 23:23 Espers wrote: I don't see why you'd ever use Swarm Hosts over Mutalisks in this "harass" role. I think the following will hold for most sets of two units with overlapping roles: one unit will be mainstream while the other will be primarily used for timing and meta-game purposes. So if the mutalisk is the most prominent threat then swarm host play can punish you if you excessively prepare anti-air. Swarm hosts also facilitate a quicker transition to hive and infestor compositions. For a more fundamental difference between the two units, I suppose you could characterize them as immobile army harassment versus mobile multi-purpose harassment. There are situations where the former is more useful maybe. | ||
|
Espers
United Kingdom606 Posts
On December 23 2014 00:08 TedCruz2016 wrote: 1. Higher DPS 2. Ground attack (turrets and spores would be useless) 3. Unpredictable (compared to mutas, your opponents will immediately know what you're up to when your spire is detected) 4. No resource cost. I really can't see these making up for the lack of mobility of both Swarm Hosts and Locusts. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote: Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy.  I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. | ||
Olli
Austria24417 Posts
Once that's established, phasing out sentries and perhaps even overcharge as the prime defensive tools becomes a hell of a lot easier. I know I've brought this up before but I feel like it would solve pretty much everything - and happens to be the exact thing protoss seems to lack in Blizzard's current LotV package. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24202 Posts
On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote: Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy. I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. Sadly with the ravager I think Blizzard is more in the state of mind of trying to nullify the strength of FF in ZvP instead of something revolving around the removal of forcefield -which is a mistake if you ask me, Protoss is indeed doing fine with very little sentries in TvP/PvP. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 23 2014 02:47 DarkLordOlli wrote: What if they just introduced a strong core gateway unit that could only be built from actual gateways, not warpgates? You can leave warpgate in just fine, as long as that strong unit can't be built from them. That would give protoss tons of strategic options. How many WGs, how many regular gates? Once that's established, phasing out sentries and perhaps even overcharge as the prime defensive tools becomes a hell of a lot easier. I know I've brought this up before but I feel like it would solve pretty much everything - and happens to be the exact thing protoss seems to lack in Blizzard's current LotV package. I was told StarBow had this during a while with the Dragoon, don't know if they left it that way or changed it. | ||
|
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
| ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2647 Posts
On December 23 2014 02:50 TheDwf wrote: I was told StarBow had this during a while with the Dragoon, don't know if they left it that way or changed it. They still do, it has worked greath for them, I think is a really good idea, besides its not like it will be the only thing they would be taking from Starbow | ||
|
gmorf33
25 Posts
On December 21 2014 02:09 Freeborn wrote: The reaper is one of the units that bothers me the most - not beause its incredibly bad or makes the gameplay worse like the MSC, sentry or colossus. It's because nobody ever fuckign builds them past the first scout(s). That's not enough reason to exist for a unit in SC2 IMO. My idea would be to give the reaper an upgrade that allows it to place one widow mine. I think the widowmine is a crappy "unit" and this way they become less weird due to their limited production and the inability to relocate them, that plus making the reaper useful again. it should probably also get a very slight damage increase (maybe together with the nitro packs). But I know terran players probably love their mine so whatever :p Actually, this would be kind of a cool idea for the reaper. Give each one like 1-2 mines they can plant and remove the widow mine from the factory. That makes it more like a Vulture from BW and gives it a use all game long: Scouting and map control via mines. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 23 2014 06:35 gmorf33 wrote: Actually, this would be kind of a cool idea for the reaper. Give each one like 1-2 mines they can plant and remove the widow mine from the factory. That makes it more like a Vulture from BW and gives it a use all game long: Scouting and map control via mines. I don't think the Reaper is the good unit for that. Besides, the Mine as an autonomous unit is one of the few domains where SC2 innovated in a way that didn't turn into something worse or a disaster. But even if it's pretty much the only good HotS addition, it can be further improved: - First it should be released from its core role in bio TvZ (aiming for Marines/Tanks/Mines as the bio midgame TvZ composition would be ideal) and TvP against Templar play. It should act as a support unit, both for bio and mech (right now the latter is not viable because of the 2 supply cost). - Turn it into a 1 supply unit. This will allow Terran to place Mines on the map, for control and defence, without a significant commitment in supply. Supply inflation is really a major problem in SC2 and tons of units should be reworked around a decreased supply cost in order to allow more army splitting. - Damage should be toned down accordingly. Oracles should have less impact on early game PvT (and PvP!) so that the bonus damage to shields can go. This way, primary Protoss units would no longer be one-shot by Mines. The splash damage should be decreased as well since it would be possible to build more Mines. Regarding splash damage, a differentiation between ground and air units could be introduced. | ||
| ||
