|
On December 18 2014 07:04 SackOfWetMice wrote:
Why not give the Infestor's "flat unit damage buff" to the new Protoss unit (but only affects gateway units)? Couple it with a couple sentries (guardian shield) and you get slightly stronger, beefier early game gateway armies to allow toss to survive until T3 (splash) units.
And then Protoss still builds the deathball with buffed gate units. No thanks.
|
On December 18 2014 06:53 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 06:35 Tsubbi wrote:
i wish they would add just 1 unit per race and instead focus on adjusting existing ones, there is so much potential in underused things Yeah, this; except perhaps for Zerg, where both the Lurker and the Ravager can be nice.
They should remove the swarm host and replace it with the lurker, I think that's the superior choice. The game probably has enough units already, one more per race would be okay, but two is pushing it. Like, what's even the point of the cyclone and herc if not to simply add new units? The disruptor is there to fulfill a similar role as the colossus at the same tech level.
I don't know, actually, part of me thinks that if mobas can get away with 100+ heroes then it would be okay to have multiple overlapping units in sc2. It makes scouting more difficult, it adds to the knowledge entry barrier, the game becomes more difficult to balance and it loses some of its clarity. There are benefits though.
|
On December 18 2014 07:08 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 06:53 TheDwf wrote:On December 18 2014 06:35 Tsubbi wrote:
i wish they would add just 1 unit per race and instead focus on adjusting existing ones, there is so much potential in underused things Yeah, this; except perhaps for Zerg, where both the Lurker and the Ravager can be nice. They should remove the swarm host and replace it with the lurker, I think that's the superior choice. The game probably has enough units already, one more per race would be okay, but two is pushing it. Like, what's even the point of the cyclone and herc if not to simply add new units? The disruptor is there to fulfill a similar role to the colossus at the same tech level. I don't know, actually, part of me thinks that if mobas can get away with 100+ heroes then it would be okay to have multiple overlapping units in sc2. It makes scouting more difficult, it adds to the knowledge entry barrier, the game becomes more difficult to balance and it loses some of its clarity. There are benefits though.
SH can be good for the game. See: ForGG vs Life. When they take on the role of the BW tank and other Zerg units act as the vulture, the dynamic is very engaging.
|
On December 18 2014 06:52 DinoMight wrote:
Also I don't understand what they're doing.
1) Upgrades should be meaningful.
2) Removes a core Immortal ability and makes it an upgrade.
-_____- ???
How about make the extended WP range thing an upgrade to address balance issues?
The whole point of Immortals is that they're tough. Without any sort of special shields or abilities they're pretty useless (Mortals).
Context is everything. If the immortal is functional without the ability and it's placed as an upgrade then that's a good example of having meaningful upgrades in the game that change unit interactions. However, if the immortal needs the shield to function and on top of that you were used to the shield ability to begin with then it becomes an annoying upgrade which perhaps merely exists as a necessary evil. It depends partly on one's point of view though.
|
On December 18 2014 07:04 SackOfWetMice wrote:
Why not give the Infestor's "flat unit damage buff" to the new Protoss unit (but only affects gateway units)? Couple it with a few sentries (guardian shield, force fields on your ramp) and you get slightly stronger, beefier early game gateway armies to allow toss to survive until T3 (splash) units.
I think it would be perfect. Sentries/Stalkers/Zealots that do a little more damage against early game bio/roach pushes.
Make it slow like Sentries, and not have an attack of its' own, like HTs/Infestors.
I call it the number 3 deathball effect unit, the first is the colossus, the second is the sentry.
I agree that toss needs something for the early/mid game specially with new z and t units and warpgate nerf, but not yet another thing that force the protoss army to stay clumped.
@ Grumbels: i think overlapping units can make scouting less effective and its no good. You scout a robo bay and don't know if its disruptor or colossus. Or early armory and don't know if its Hercs or hellbats (or thor rush  ). Its potentially bad.
|
I'm somewhat discouraged and confused that they're removing the Photon Overcharge nerf. LotV is the last opportunity Blizzard has to redesign Protoss in a way that they'll actually need--get ready for it--units (!!!) to defend aggression; NOT one hero unit and one click.
I like a lot of the other changes being discussed, particularly in regards to quickening the pace of the game and placing greater emphasis on macro and harassment as opposed to turtling into deathballs. Photon Overcharge remaining the way it is, though, seems to fly in the face of that philosophy.
|
On December 18 2014 07:04 SackOfWetMice wrote:
Why not give the Infestor's "flat unit damage buff" to the new Protoss unit (but only affects gateway units)? Couple it with a few sentries (guardian shield, force fields on your ramp) and you get slightly stronger, beefier early game gateway armies to allow toss to survive until T3 (splash) units.
I think it would be perfect. Sentries/Stalkers/Zealots that do a little more damage against early game bio/roach pushes.
Make it slow like Sentries, and not have an attack of its' own, like HTs/Infestors.
That or something similar would be my wish. Imagine like sth that needs twighlight council tech and is some kind of adept templar or sth and has abilities like the flat damage buff or shield recharge.
These abilities could be interesting if they have to be controled correctly. Letz say they need the unit to channel and stand in one place for a while. This would also open possibilities for counterplay such as kiting away or target firing that unit.
On December 18 2014 07:12 Superbanana wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 07:04 SackOfWetMice wrote:
Why not give the Infestor's "flat unit damage buff" to the new Protoss unit (but only affects gateway units)? Couple it with a few sentries (guardian shield, force fields on your ramp) and you get slightly stronger, beefier early game gateway armies to allow toss to survive until T3 (splash) units.
I think it would be perfect. Sentries/Stalkers/Zealots that do a little more damage against early game bio/roach pushes.
Make it slow like Sentries, and not have an attack of its' own, like HTs/Infestors. I call it the number 3 deathball effect unit, the first is the colossus, the second is the sentry. I agree that toss needs something for the early/mid game specially with new z and t units and warpgate nerf, but not yet another thing that force the protoss army to stay clumped.
I dont think thats automatically true. The deathball effect from the sentry comes mostly from FF and the deathball effect from colossus comes from the fact that its AoE stacks. A P unit with an attack or shield buff which is reasonably sized and does not stack(!) would work just as well in small to medium sized groups.
|
On December 18 2014 07:08 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 06:53 TheDwf wrote:On December 18 2014 06:35 Tsubbi wrote:
i wish they would add just 1 unit per race and instead focus on adjusting existing ones, there is so much potential in underused things Yeah, this; except perhaps for Zerg, where both the Lurker and the Ravager can be nice. They should remove the swarm host and replace it with the lurker, I think that's the superior choice. The game probably has enough units already, one more per race would be okay, but two is pushing it. Like, what's even the point of the cyclone and herc if not to simply add new units? The disruptor is there to fulfill a similar role to the colossus at the same tech level. I don't know, actually, part of me thinks that if mobas can get away with 100+ heroes then it would be okay to have multiple overlapping units in sc2. It makes scouting more difficult, it adds to the knowledge entry barrier, the game becomes more difficult to balance and it loses some of its clarity. There are benefits though.
Yeah, really don't like the new SH at all from playing/watching the mod.
I could see the cyclone has a great bio-->mech transition unit. Since it doesn't have obvious drawbacks and is somewhat mobile it could work as kind of "supermarine" to combat ultras and Protoss lategame in general when splash becomes too much too handle. Especially since the unit is gasheavy it might be very smooth.
Herc, I don't know. I think it can be a fun unit, but as they write in that blog they too don't seem to have a clue what it really should do. Just *something* against ling/bling and light and some cool micro. I don't dislike that, because cool micro equals fun. I'm not sure the unit will really fullfill that.
for the overlap... just make reduce the actual buildable units to 7-10 and then prechoose your compositions. (then add a new unit every few months)
|
|
|
On December 18 2014 07:11 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 07:08 Grumbels wrote:On December 18 2014 06:53 TheDwf wrote:On December 18 2014 06:35 Tsubbi wrote:
i wish they would add just 1 unit per race and instead focus on adjusting existing ones, there is so much potential in underused things Yeah, this; except perhaps for Zerg, where both the Lurker and the Ravager can be nice. They should remove the swarm host and replace it with the lurker, I think that's the superior choice. The game probably has enough units already, one more per race would be okay, but two is pushing it. Like, what's even the point of the cyclone and herc if not to simply add new units? The disruptor is there to fulfill a similar role to the colossus at the same tech level. I don't know, actually, part of me thinks that if mobas can get away with 100+ heroes then it would be okay to have multiple overlapping units in sc2. It makes scouting more difficult, it adds to the knowledge entry barrier, the game becomes more difficult to balance and it loses some of its clarity. There are benefits though. SH can be good for the game. See: ForGG vs Life. When they take on the role of the BW tank and other Zerg units act as the vulture, the dynamic is very engaging.
Well, the current swarm host is already gone and replaced with a different version. And even if the unit was the cause for various interesting games there were too many downsides and the game is better off without it. Like, if you had a new unit design and you would say to yourself: "well, this is broken some of the time, but it might also be cool sometimes" then it would be obvious you had to cut your losses and try again with something else.
Honestly though, it might be cool to have "wild-card" units like the new swarm host which do not fulfill a strictly necessary role, but which can be used as a surprise strategy to create unique games.
|
On December 18 2014 07:12 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 06:52 DinoMight wrote:
Also I don't understand what they're doing.
1) Upgrades should be meaningful.
2) Removes a core Immortal ability and makes it an upgrade.
-_____- ???
How about make the extended WP range thing an upgrade to address balance issues?
The whole point of Immortals is that they're tough. Without any sort of special shields or abilities they're pretty useless (Mortals).
Context is everything. If the immortal is functional without the ability and it's placed as an upgrade then that's a good example of having meaningful upgrades in the game that change unit interactions. However, if the immortal needs the shield to function and on top of that you were used to the shield ability to begin with then it becomes an annoying upgrade which perhaps merely exists as a necessary evil. It depends partly on one's point of view though.
To adress Blizzard's post said that upgrades for late game units are redundant especially since the units need those upgrades to function and there's no reason to not have them. Like Ultralisks literally don't work without armor and you usually get yamato can as soon as you build battlecruisers.. they said that upgrades should be done to make lower power units more viable in the late game. I'm not sure how viable immortals will be without the upgrade but again blizzard is just trying different things to avoid impossible to stop immortal warp prison harrssment.
but yeah this all depends on how viable immortals are without the upgrade.
|
On December 18 2014 07:16 SatedSC2 wrote:
The more I hear, the less I like.
Between this and the map-pool going back to the horror that was season 3, I'm finding it very hard to get motivated to play...
It's just for two weeks, you know.
|
|
|
|
|
The resources is in the right direction. Focusing on how to make workers more efficient on multiple bases is important to give an economy advantage to riskier 5-6 base play (or something of that nature).
I really think 10 workers is better simply to allow an early worker to be sent out with the 15-30 seconds extra to proxy and give more room for openers. The games would be too cookie-cutter if they cross the fine line of early variations. It'd be boring seeing the same "solved" build beating every cheese or opener in the game.
Protoss need a fighting unit as stated. I could see a new T2 Protoss unit that did small AOE being a beneficial transition instead of colossus or templar instantly. I'm really sure a creative and fun unit can be made even without splash damage. One with the ability to cross through sentry force fields or had an extra attack every x seconds for hit and run potential can synergize better than another harassment unit. The extra attack could be anything from a slow to a psi blast. Just throwing out ideas.
It has been cool seeing mech be viable. For the Terran upgrades, if it needs to be split for balance issues then split the air and mech attack upgrades while keeping the armor shared. That'd make a mech/air composition 3 upgrades instead of 4 for viability sake. The herc knockback can actually be interesting.
Zerg changes seem well but are still developing like the rest of the game. I haven't thought of another useful infestor spell. A temporary move speed bonus aoe on creep could be a defensive spell. Clearly a baneling catapult is needed. Granted, being able to launch banelings at air units would be hilarious.
Excited for LotV!
|
On December 18 2014 07:06 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 07:04 SackOfWetMice wrote:
Why not give the Infestor's "flat unit damage buff" to the new Protoss unit (but only affects gateway units)? Couple it with a couple sentries (guardian shield) and you get slightly stronger, beefier early game gateway armies to allow toss to survive until T3 (splash) units. And then Protoss still builds the deathball with buffed gate units. No thanks.
...You can obviously balance it. Smaller area of effect, smaller damage buff, etc. Just something to make early Sentries/Stalkers that are in a defensive position slightly more effective.
|
|
|
Or possibly, remove Photon Overcharge and replace it with a spell that makes the Nexus give a flat damage/armor buff to friendly units near it.
|
United States7483 Posts
Blizzard is going about this expansion thing the wrong way. Rather than reducing the minerals in each patch, they should be reducing the amount of patches at each base, meaning saturation is fewer workers. This encourages more expanding to take advantage of the extra supply: suddenly you can make use of 4 or 5 bases simultaneously rather than just holding extra for when you run out in your other bases. The current form simply punishes players for not expanding, rather than rewarding them for doing so.
It also unnecessarily punishes players for falling behind. Come-backs become much harder when you can't build up for a while, try to take favorable engagements, and slowly expand. You run out of money before you can rebuild now, meaning one fight is more likely than ever to kill you. Reducing mineral patches will reduce income rates overall at the start of the game and will encourage more, but smaller, engagements and make deathballing harder and maxing out slower. The current system they are using will just make the game even more of a one and done.
|
I have been thinking, how bout for terran they give a bomber/stealth fighter type unit. There have been no new terran air units yet, and no air units that deal aoe to ground (not counting seeker missle). With this unit you draw a "bombing path" with your mouse LOL-esque. This path is visible to the opponent who then has to micro away from this red area. The user could use this ability to split armies in half or prevent the retreat of an army. Give it high health so it can't be focused down so quickly. Wahla!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
