|
Norway839 Posts
 thx for the comments, i don't have a direct line to the design team but i could forward it to someone! IMO energy would be better, it's very easy to tweak its power as well since you have far more variables than just the flat cooldown. You can make it stronger early game by having it spawn with full mana - 2 disruptor shots - ... you can change strength over time by tweaking its energy regeneration rate, you can make shots cost more or less, bla bla ...
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MQm4Y1Q.png)
^ kinda horrible chart but it shows the basic idea, let's say you need the green bar to reach 30 on the Y axis (say 100 energy) to fire a shot, 60 on the Y axis would be the max shot (say 200 energy).. you can tweak all the variables very easily and it's far more versatile and interesting than the passive disruptor or the angry one that we saw a lot of during the PvP's at dreamhack ~
I know that energy units also can promote turtling (BL/infestor) and one has to be very careful designing them but being able to send in a warp prism with templars ready to feedback and having counter-blinks to snipe the prism, etc ... all sounds way better to me than just stalker disruptor (tempest) vs stalker disruptor (tempest)
If turning Disruptors into EMP-able energy units should render Protoss 100% incapable of winning vs Ghost/bio/liberator then Protoss should get some love to its other units ~
On November 30 2015 21:47 KOtical wrote:
i wonder why nobody did use the oracle traps in combination with disruptors, could be super strong, but i guess theyll need to snipe observers before...
I thought of this too, you can put them down in between bases and create a 'trap field', but with detection the stasis traps are easily triggered by a single blink stalker or killed. They're quite expensive energy wise and expose the oracle, they also take 4 seconds to deploy so they can't really be used in a real battle. Compared to the strength of the stalker/disruptor death-ball, they're just not very strong :/
|
I'm having strokey-beard thoughts about Blink using energy, now...
|
I dont play protoss but can forcefield block disruptor shots ? If not wouldn't it nice being able to ff disruptor shot ? I think it will enable a lot of nice micro moments
And with this it would only change the pvp mu
|
Norway839 Posts
On November 30 2015 21:56 Umpteen wrote:
I'm having strokey-beard thoughts about Blink using energy, now...
"He is out of blinks !! This push looked unstoppable for the first minute Tasteless, but after blinking in and out of the main two times, these stalkers are OH SO LOW on energy!! MVP is hanging on by the skin of his teeth!!! Another blink is almost ready, where will MC send his stalkers?"
LOLOLOL~
|
On November 30 2015 21:58 Killmouse wrote:
I dont play protoss but can forcefield block disruptor shots ? If not wouldn't it nice being able to ff disruptor shot ? I think it will enable a lot of nice micro moments
And with this it would only change the pvp mu
i dont know if they can, but its not worth it gas price to high and when it comes down to that situation running out of energy and then are to slow to dodge the disruptor shots, its simple worthless... especially vs blink stalkers wich simple blinks over ff´s...
what i found interessting though as far as i could see the disruptor shots could block each other.
|
On November 30 2015 21:58 Killmouse wrote:
I dont play protoss but can forcefield block disruptor shots ? If not wouldn't it nice being able to ff disruptor shot ? I think it will enable a lot of nice micro moments
And with this it would only change the pvp mu
would you really start using sentries just to block disruptor shots? Sentries run out of energy, are weak combatants, eat up your gas and can't dodge disruptor shots when they get around the forcefields, in particular, whenever you leave a choke. I don't see this being useful, though it would be hilarious to see disruptor balls being forcefielded in a way to deal friendly fire
|
On November 30 2015 22:07 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2015 21:58 Killmouse wrote:
I dont play protoss but can forcefield block disruptor shots ? If not wouldn't it nice being able to ff disruptor shot ? I think it will enable a lot of nice micro moments
And with this it would only change the pvp mu would you really start using sentries just to block disruptor shots? Sentries run out of energy, are weak combatants, eat up your gas and can't dodge disruptor shots when they get around the forcefields, in particular, whenever you leave a choke. I don't see this being useful, though it would be hilarious to see disruptor balls being forcefielded in a way to deal friendly fire
Well was just an idea , I know nothing about protoss haha
|
simple solution, replace disruptor with reaver 
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On November 30 2015 21:51 Liquid`Snute wrote:+ Show Spoiler + thx for the comments, i don't have a direct line to the design team but i could forward it to someone! IMO energy would be better, it's very easy to tweak its power as well since you have far more variables than just the flat cooldown. You can make it stronger early game by having it spawn with full mana - 2 disruptor shots - ... you can change strength over time by tweaking its energy regeneration rate, you can make shots cost more or less, bla bla ... ^ kinda horrible chart but it shows the basic idea, let's say you need the green bar to reach 30 on the Y axis (say 100 energy) to fire a shot, 60 on the Y axis would be the max shot (say 200 energy).. you can tweak all the variables very easily and it's far more versatile and interesting than the passive disruptor or the angry one that we saw a lot of during the PvP's at dreamhack ~ I know that energy units also can promote turtling (BL/infestor) and one has to be very careful designing them but being able to send in a warp prism with templars ready to feedback and having counter-blinks to snipe the prism, etc ... all sounds way better to me than just stalker disruptor (tempest) vs stalker disruptor (tempest) If turning Disruptors into EMP-able energy units should render Protoss 100% incapable of winning vs Ghost/bio/liberator then Protoss should get some love to its other units ~ Show nested quote +On November 30 2015 21:47 KOtical wrote:
i wonder why nobody did use the oracle traps in combination with disruptors, could be super strong, but i guess theyll need to snipe observers before... I thought of this too, you can put them down in between bases and create a 'trap field', but with detection the stasis traps are easily triggered by a single blink stalker or killed. They're quite expensive energy wise and expose the oracle, they also take 4 seconds to deploy so they can't really be used in a real battle. Compared to the strength of the stalker/disruptor death-ball, they're just not very strong :/
There is no time to use stasis traps. There's hardly a time to warp in units because when you are warping in you have to look at the place for a while. Take revealed that Parting had 455 APM on average(converted to normal time from Blizzard values) vs Showtime(?? I hope it was this match). There's no place and there's high risk when you control the oracle taht you will lose to a random doom ball.
Maybe later after players get used to it, but i don't think so, the risk is too big.
|
On November 30 2015 22:17 KOtical wrote:simple solution, replace disruptor with reaver
I wonder how many of the people here actually think it will be a good idea?
I can't see it working when the game is so fast paced
|
Hm, so Snute's proposal in numbers so far is:
200 energy max
100 energy per shot
100 starting energy
3.3333 energy/second (100 energy in 30seconds)
No cooldown.
So I thought about tweaking those a bit:
200 energy max
125 energy per shot
125 starting energy
4.1666 energy/second (125 energy in 30seconds, 50energy in 12seconds)
reasoning? The shots over time curve out a little.
--> No double shots possible, second shot from a full energy disruptor comes 12seconds after the first one (9seconds buffed in comparison to now, very nice against lurkers for example)
--> Consecutive shots come every 30seconds
Not sure if that solves it though. I played around with different energy numbers too but I'm not certain one can make it more interesting with the artificial 25steps of energy (already throwing out the energy regeneration and max energy standardizations!), either I get double shots or you I severely nerfed disruptors in many situations. Maybe a combo of cooldowns and energy numbers could make it curve out more interestingly.
|
If you put energy on disruptors they would probably get countered too hard by ghosts and templars. Tough its questionable if anyone would go templars in PVP. But making the unit useless by getting emped sounds too harsh.
|
On November 30 2015 23:14 Aikin wrote:
If you put energy on disruptors they would probably get countered too hard by ghosts and templars. Tough its questionable if anyone would go templars in PVP. But making the unit useless by getting emped sounds too harsh.
Could give them a total energy pool of 250 and make each shot cost 150, with super high energy regen rate. That way one EMP would not wreck those with full energy or close to full energy (it removes 100 energy afaik). It's not elegant but it gets the job done I guess.
With that said, while I think disruptors with energy is interesting (makes Feedback relevant in PvP) I'm not convinced yet.
Edit: Ofc then the templar would own the disruptor, duh.
|
8751 Posts
I wouldn't put much effort into redesigning disruptors based on the DH game, unless it's just for fun. We're far from the end of the development of playing with disruptors and playing against disruptors. Whatever you design now based on, for example, the Parting vs Showtime series, is going to be outdated by the time it's implemented. I'm sure that if no changes were made and people had to practice this version of the game for five years, we'd look back at this series and laugh. How quickly will gameplay change naturally to a state where the dissatisfied have become satisfied? Some people were dissatisfied while watching that series. Are there enough of those people to make a change?
|
On December 01 2015 00:29 NonY wrote:
I wouldn't put much effort into redesigning disruptors based on the DH game, unless it's just for fun. We're far from the end of the development of playing with disruptors and playing against disruptors. Whatever you design now based on, for example, the Parting vs Showtime series, is going to be outdated by the time it's implemented. I'm sure that if no changes were made and people had to practice this version of the game for five years, we'd look back at this series and laugh. How quickly will gameplay change naturally to a state where the dissatisfied have become satisfied? Some people were dissatisfied while watching that series. Are there enough of those people to make a change?
I agree with the concept of holding back changes, I think this has been stated by many people many times. However if a change is proposed that , in the inventors opinion, would improve the gameplay overall is it not right to consider it seriously.
Like I understand where you are coming from on a general level but you haven't really said if you think the switch to energy rather than Cooldown would be an improvement or why it would be bad.
|
8751 Posts
On November 30 2015 22:33 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2015 21:51 Liquid`Snute wrote:+ Show Spoiler + thx for the comments, i don't have a direct line to the design team but i could forward it to someone! IMO energy would be better, it's very easy to tweak its power as well since you have far more variables than just the flat cooldown. You can make it stronger early game by having it spawn with full mana - 2 disruptor shots - ... you can change strength over time by tweaking its energy regeneration rate, you can make shots cost more or less, bla bla ... ^ kinda horrible chart but it shows the basic idea, let's say you need the green bar to reach 30 on the Y axis (say 100 energy) to fire a shot, 60 on the Y axis would be the max shot (say 200 energy).. you can tweak all the variables very easily and it's far more versatile and interesting than the passive disruptor or the angry one that we saw a lot of during the PvP's at dreamhack ~ I know that energy units also can promote turtling (BL/infestor) and one has to be very careful designing them but being able to send in a warp prism with templars ready to feedback and having counter-blinks to snipe the prism, etc ... all sounds way better to me than just stalker disruptor (tempest) vs stalker disruptor (tempest) If turning Disruptors into EMP-able energy units should render Protoss 100% incapable of winning vs Ghost/bio/liberator then Protoss should get some love to its other units ~ On November 30 2015 21:47 KOtical wrote:
i wonder why nobody did use the oracle traps in combination with disruptors, could be super strong, but i guess theyll need to snipe observers before... I thought of this too, you can put them down in between bases and create a 'trap field', but with detection the stasis traps are easily triggered by a single blink stalker or killed. They're quite expensive energy wise and expose the oracle, they also take 4 seconds to deploy so they can't really be used in a real battle. Compared to the strength of the stalker/disruptor death-ball, they're just not very strong :/ There is no time to use stasis traps. There's hardly a time to warp in units because when you are warping in you have to look at the place for a while. Take revealed that Parting had 455 APM on average(converted to normal time from Blizzard values) vs Showtime(?? I hope it was this match). There's no place and there's high risk when you control the oracle taht you will lose to a random doom ball.
Whenever your army is moving away from your opponents army, it is safe. So you can always retreat from standing just outside disruptor range, and while your army is on the move you can give 100% attention to something else without worry of your whole army dying. You don't necessarily have to go back to your base either, but rather move laterally to pressure a different enemy base. You can also keep your distance and have an observer or some other spotter unit in between the armies. Or you can use revelation on the enemy disruptors. There are definitely pockets of time that can be created.
Both players have to agree to keep their armies near each other unless one player is already at their own base, but then that means the opponent's army is so far away from their own bases that they're more vulnerable to harass and split armies.
The disruptor is so potent at wiping out ground forces and protoss will almost always have a mainly ground force coming out of the mid game that it has made players obsessed with avoiding shots on their main army. However, I think that a player who comes in with a plan of how to split armies and multitask and comes in with a lot of practice of doing it will win more than 50% of the time against a player who tends to keep most of his army together and mainly looks for good disruptor shots on the enemy army and does little bits of harass with small groups of units. I think there are also composition changes to be made, both for attacking a disruptor player early when he only has one or two disruptors and for the late game. I think there are timing attacks that will be designed to kill disruptor builds early on and I think there's more to late game composition than stalker-disruptor and eventually tempests.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
Well, this topic is read by great players and casters(Hi, Snute  ) I would like to ask them a question:
How much do you like balance patches during WCS? I don't think Blizzard would patch the game during a single weekend, so DH, IEM and HSC are fine, but how about the last time TB was furious about SH nerf a day before his player was supposed to play
Why am I asking? Because NonY wrote "lets wait", but if we wait long enough the full show of SC2 leagues and tournaments starts. Proleague and GSL have usually early start and I honestly think that balance patches released a day or two before some group is played are bad, but I am low a level player. Tell me how big of a deal it really is, thanks.
Edit> I know taht TB was furious about promised maps with old balance that were not delivered and not about Blizzard balancing the game
|
On December 01 2015 00:28 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2015 23:14 Aikin wrote:
If you put energy on disruptors they would probably get countered too hard by ghosts and templars. Tough its questionable if anyone would go templars in PVP. But making the unit useless by getting emped sounds too harsh. Could give them a total energy pool of 250 and make each shot cost 150, with super high energy regen rate. That way one EMP would not wreck those with full energy or close to full energy (it removes 100 energy afaik). It's not elegant but it gets the job done I guess. With that said, while I think disruptors with energy is interesting (makes Feedback relevant in PvP) I'm not convinced yet. Edit: Ofc then the templar would own the disruptor, duh.
Yeah, I thought about various design concepts for that (it is mainly for fun @Nony and I'm not convinced myself that this is a good solution, or that a solution is needed. I'm one of those guys who enjoys those disruptor wars... but then again I'm also one of those guys who would tune in for the Swarm Host games and that in general would enjoy the game more if it was slower)
There are advantages and disadvantages to many of them:
Higher energy or regeneration makes it more robust against EMPs
Higher energy also makes it more vulnerable to feedback
Snute's 200energy, 100cost solution makes it so that a fully loaded disruptor could take an EMP and still have a shot.
Lower max energy makes the energy regeneration more natural and the unit more robust against feedback.
Alternatively I thought it would be interesting if the Disruptor used his shields instead of his energy and had high shield regeneration instead, or a second ability that granted high shield regeneration for some drawback like becoming stationary for a few seconds. After all without a second spell there is no energy tension anyways, so it's not that interesting to put energy on the unit and only makes it vulnerable to feedback. (like WoL/HotS battlecruisers, WoL Thors)
|
8751 Posts
On December 01 2015 00:36 PepperMintTea wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2015 00:29 NonY wrote:
I wouldn't put much effort into redesigning disruptors based on the DH game, unless it's just for fun. We're far from the end of the development of playing with disruptors and playing against disruptors. Whatever you design now based on, for example, the Parting vs Showtime series, is going to be outdated by the time it's implemented. I'm sure that if no changes were made and people had to practice this version of the game for five years, we'd look back at this series and laugh. How quickly will gameplay change naturally to a state where the dissatisfied have become satisfied? Some people were dissatisfied while watching that series. Are there enough of those people to make a change? I agree with the concept of holding back changes, I think this has been stated by many people many times. However if a change is proposed that , in the inventors opinion, would improve the gameplay overall is it not right to consider it seriously. Like I understand where you are coming from on a general level but you haven't really said if you think the switch to energy rather than Cooldown would be an improvement or why it would be bad.
Just based on the policy that fewer changes are better. The game is hard to play and things take a lot of time for even the best players to learn. Players are really starting to sink their teeth into how disruptor games are played and probably during the first season of WCS 2016 we'll see a lot more stuff. It just feels wrong to erase that effort and knowledge when it hasn't gone stale yet. Sort of the essence of SC is to have these kinds of problems and to work through them in-game rather than changing the rules of the game. And there's no way to really know if a proposed change really would be a perfect improvement and not just different. It'd take a really extreme case to change something that hasn't stopped naturally changing in-game.
|
While I enjoyed watching the insane Showtime Parting PvP volleyball match, it did give me the feeling that in this situation, there is no way for one player to win, unless the other one makes a big mistake, or via an endlessly slow tempest attrition grind. And that would become frustrating for players and spectators after a while, not as bad as, but similar to swarmhost games. If it really turns out like that, a change would be for the better. I though about it a little, and came up only with increasing the cooldown of the disruptors. Them being able to shoot to often, made it impossible for any player to commit to an attack even with 30 or 50 supply advantage. I don't know if that nerfs Protoss too much in the other match-ups? I like Snute's idea a lot as well, seems elegant. Something else that comes to mind, maybe if Immortal shields allow them to survive one hit, that would make it just a tiny bit more possible to commit an attack, and only affects PvP?
Anyway we still have to wait and see how it develops, maybe there is a different way to go? Maybe it's possible to split a bigger part of the main army off, to harass/destroy the opponent base, while having enough disruptors in the main army to hold back the opponents main army? And what about carriers? ;-)
Edit: btw great casting Snute!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
