EPTInstead they introduced the liberator
In Detail: Tank Buff Numbers - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Penev
28524 Posts
Instead they introduced the liberator | ||
|
wishr
Russian Federation262 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On December 03 2015 15:46 todespolka wrote:EDIT: No matter what you say, sc2 is a great game. Its the best rts out there right now and that makes it a success. How can you deny that? Just because that's the RTS that currently receives the largest amount of sponsoring and investments doesn't mean it is the best RTS or even such a great game^^ | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
one of the posts is actually just flat out true. if you want to create a test map to see how stronger tanks fare, you can totally do it. it takes intiative that arguably the games developers should make, but it's possible and quite easy. i'd say you'd have a pretty alright time inviting higher level players to test it out for you since it's an interesting idea. there's also another great point about the tank DPS as it is compared to the BW tank (the comparison that is so heavily made by the OP and other people here). believe it or not, it is actually pretty similar and the main differences are the initial shots (that kill and force commital in most cases) and essentially the burst damage. bottom line is, nothing is magically going to get solved even if by all your might you are theory crafting through rose tinted glasses. initially these threads started as, what's with mech? (about tanks) mech - how to make it viable (and it was about tanks) insert thread here, about tanks and now we have thread about the tank. all the props in the world for putting together a concise and neatly formatted post that touches on what you feel is important (once again), but i have to say it gets old. IMO, get testing, or grab some connections if this matters so much to you and others. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On December 03 2015 16:47 metroid composite wrote: I dunno, I honestly think people are romanticizing BW tanks, and seem to feel that if we had exactly BW tanks in every stat, that Tanks would somehow be good right now, and that somehow that not having BW tanks is the problem with Tanks right now. I will just quietly direct you to Lurkers, which were cut from WotL because they were so bad when faced with competent pathfinding. Look at their stats now--ok so they cost 20% more overall, but in exchange get a 50% range increase, get a 60% HP increase, get a 50% attack increase, and a 48% attack speed increase (overall 123% DPS increase). here is why the pathing is actually incompetent in SC2 : units automatically clump together. This was put into the game to make control as easy as possible for "noobs". It helps maximising damage automatically when you don't control your units. But in return, units also clump together automatically. Tactics teach us that it is in most cases a very bad move to clump all your entities together, as you are very vulnerable to AoE, friendly fire, and cannot surprise or control many positions, you show everything in one spot, etc. So you get a lot of extra necessary "split" action that's one of the main micro moves in SC2 to dodge the AoE damage. It is actually not competent pathing ^^ and it brings tremendous damage to the game strategically and tactically, including to the depth of micro. Not sure what you mean with your comparison with lurker, everything in SC2 deals a lot more DPS than in BW. Lurker has to deal more damage also especially in a game where everything is highly mobile or even teleports around and holding a position is most of the time not even particularly beneficial. So a tank in SC2 may want to have higher stats than in SC1 in that context, but currently it doesn't... | ||
|
cheekymonkey
France1387 Posts
On December 03 2015 12:36 ledarsi wrote: Are you... trolling? Every single ranged attack except Marines and Siege Tanks uses a projectile. Those balls of light that the Tempest shoots? Projectile. The acid that Roaches shoot? Projectile. The grenade that Marauders shoot? Projectile. It is flatly untrue that there are no other units which use a projectile. You might dislike introducing the projectile since it causes units to overkill, but the tank would hardly be the only unit with a projectile for an attack. I assumed OP meant that the projectile would fire at the units position at the ground, and not follow the unit it around like marauder or stalker shots. Thus it would miss a lot of shots, only dealing partial damage. OP could clarify perhaps. | ||
|
WeddingEpisode
United States356 Posts
| ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
On December 03 2015 18:45 ProMeTheus112 wrote: here is why the pathing is actually incompetent in SC2 : units automatically clump together. This was put into the game to make control as easy as possible for "noobs". It helps maximising damage automatically when you don't control your units. But in return, units also clump together automatically. Tactics teach us that it is in most cases a very bad move to clump all your entities together, as you are very vulnerable to AoE, friendly fire, and cannot surprise or control many positions, you show everything in one spot, etc. So you get a lot of extra necessary "split" action that's one of the main micro moves in SC2 to dodge the AoE damage. It is actually not competent pathing ^^ and it brings tremendous damage to the game strategically and tactically, including to the depth of micro. Not sure what you mean with your comparison with lurker, everything in SC2 deals a lot more DPS than in BW. Lurker has to deal more damage also especially in a game where everything is highly mobile or even teleports around and holding a position is most of the time not even particularly beneficial. So a tank in SC2 may want to have higher stats than in SC1 in that context, but currently it doesn't... i think he's saying that even with strong lurker stats, they're not the shit. competency with pathfinding probably alludes to how units that do not clump do not move efficiently around the map because players are taxed and cannot manually control units wherever they go. thus, ai is relied on with the use of sweeping mouse/keyboard inputs. on top of that, you were limited with the amount of shift commands you could do with units. i think it was 2, unless it were a move command, and this doesn't even apply to shift-queuing building placement. it's an example of anachronism, at least, to keep it that way in a newer RTS (along with removing MBS, of course). two lurkers, or even just one could hold the line against seemingly infinite marines in a zvt because waypathing (a-clicking) brought marines in a (predictable) straight line, and as icing on the cake most maps zergs will take a far 3rd or 4th base with a tiny ramp to defend. it was just a differently played rts. the point is, moving quickly or efficiently across the map with your army is easier in sc2 (for both you and your opponent) and forces players to respect a different pace. i'll use an example of MOBAs since most people have played some a bunch. you take a lategame teamfight and end up with arguably enough left over to push. if the players are experienced, they will immediately push--perhaps baiting or taking the fight closer to the enemy's side of the map in anticipation of barely winning--hoping to deal as much damage as possible. if players are inexperienced throughout the same situations, they make weird engagements, don't get as much out of the fight, or start farming to catch up before realizing that the post-teamfight pushing is the play. once they start pushing, it's already too late to deal damage and the situation snowballs and the inexperience shows. this is a small example in attempts to show that the game is very different when the pacing is set differently (in the case of experience vs. non-experience in a moba) as is in the case of SC2 vs even its previous iteration (HotS). it's an obvious statement to make when sc2 as a whole is entirely different compared to how sc1 was played after 10 years of heavy competitive play. seriously, the comparisons between the games are all pretty moot, or even unimportant. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
On December 03 2015 21:27 WeddingEpisode wrote: Blizzard could just make a mod for us to play for a while in Custom Games. or, if that doesn't happen, your average joe can do that. just give seige tanks a widow mine attack or similar and diddle the numbers a little. offtopic, i remember they did this shit at MBCgame for a wc3 league when orc was dominating too hard. they nerfed some orc units and buffed some small things a tiny amount so players wouldn't notice, but would ever so slightly feel the difference. it became a scandal, obviously. point is, i'm 100% certain it was a 30minute job or an idea you could come up with on the toilet seat. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
| ||
|
arb
Noobville17922 Posts
On December 03 2015 02:19 Yoav wrote: Nope. I saw a cool test of this once with marines vs hydra. They changed all hydra stats to be marine stats, then showed how crazy inefficient hydras are just due to the projectile travel time meaning they overkill like crazy. Marines will never overkill at all, just because their attack is instant. i always thought it was personally dumb that marines actually shoot before their rifles even turn and that makes some crazy looking micro in return l0l | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On December 03 2015 22:12 arb wrote: i always thought it was personally dumb that marines actually shoot before their rifles even turn and that makes some crazy looking micro in return l0l yeah they don't even need to stay in place during the rafale they shoot they can move immediately even though you hear a bunch of bullets being fired :S and you get the stutter bioball advancing forward almost freely | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2656 Posts
Please, we are not stupid, we know things will have to be balanced, damage tweaked, fire speed changed. The original proposition is just a start in the right direction, not the ultimate change that would make everything perfect. Its a start, something we haven't had in the last 5 years. | ||
|
sh1RoKen
Russian Federation93 Posts
But your concept will totally make Tank's role too much intersect with Liberator. My proposal - bigger splash area. Let the liberator handle big units while tank will deal with small ones. | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2142 Posts
On December 03 2015 23:23 sh1RoKen wrote: I always thought that smart fire for a single unit in game is stupid. Where is my smart blink or smart banelingmove? The idea that you can micro your bio while your tanks will be microed by AI is horrible and doesn't belong in that game. But your concept will totally make Tank's role too much intersect with Liberator. My proposal - bigger splash area. Let the liberator handle big units while tank will deal with small ones. all sc2 units with an instant attack have "smart fire", it's just a consequence of how the game engine works. | ||
|
p68
100 Posts
Now, for a different idea, what if Blizzard just finally bit the bullet and combined terran ground upgrades and left air upgrades separate? Another poster already pointed out how much of an issue this is for Terran and it alone really quells unit diversity. Maybe combine ground attack, but keep factory and infantry armor separate (totaling 3 upgrades for all ground units, just like the other two races!). Can anybody really justify why Terran needs to have completely different sets of upgrades for their ground units? Is this really an archaic relic carried over from Brood War? | ||
|
sh1RoKen
Russian Federation93 Posts
On December 03 2015 23:30 -NegativeZero- wrote: all sc2 units with an instant attack have "smart fire", it's just a consequence of how the game engine works. No they doesn't. They added this feature in WoL (or probably HotS) exclusively for siege tank. Smart fire doesn't mean that unit can't overkill. Right now siege tank changes it's target to maximize the splash damage. For example: My protoss army of 1 zealot and 5 stalkers is attacking 5 siege tanks Zealot comes in their range first and take 5 shots but survives Tight ball of 5 stalkers staying very close to each other comes to the range before tank's second shot Zealot is still alive, but all tanks will shot their second attack inside of the stalkers to maximize their damage without any additional command from terran | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 03 2015 23:45 sh1RoKen wrote: No they doesn't. They added this feature in WoL (or probably HotS) exclusively for siege tank. Smart fire doesn't mean that unit can't overkill. Right now siege tank changes it's target to maximize the splash damage. For example: My protoss army of 1 zealot and 5 stalkers is attacking 5 siege tanks Zealot comes in their range first and take 5 shots but survives Tight ball of 5 stalkers staying very close to each other comes to the range before tank's second shot Zealot is still alive, but all tanks will shot their second attack inside of the stalkers to maximize their damage without any additional command from terran this is complete bullshit | ||
|
sh1RoKen
Russian Federation93 Posts
Yes, I fucked up. Apparently I did something wrong during testing long time ago. | ||
|
HeroMystic
United States1217 Posts
On December 03 2015 23:33 p68 wrote: To the naysayers completely focused on picking apart specific ideas: you're missing the main point. Blizzard needs to do something. Something. Anything. At least make an effort! If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out, but until it's tried by the community (e.g. PTR map), we won't know. Now, for a different idea, what if Blizzard just finally bit the bullet and combined terran ground upgrades and left air upgrades separate? Another poster already pointed out how much of an issue this is for Terran and it alone really quells unit diversity. Maybe combine ground attack, but keep factory and infantry armor separate (totaling 3 upgrades for all ground units, just like the other two races!). Can anybody really justify why Terran needs to have completely different sets of upgrades for their ground units? Is this really an archaic relic carried over from Brood War? Combining Upgrades means T would have to be rebalanced for that. As shown with combining armory upgrades. If Infantry and Vehicle upgrades were combined then we would have a Biomech army that gains too much of an advantage at too rapid of a rate. Nerfs would have to happen to compensate. | ||
| ||
