|
The discussion should stay open as they will "reintroduce it at a later date."
I wonder if they were trying to fix the oracle and voidray micro trick which if performed correctly would increase the damage. If performed incorrectly it could actually reduce damage or stop the attack. (This trick was basically a-moving and then right clicking on a specific unit or structure at a specific beat pattern with the goal of increasing damage output.) I think little tricks like this which increase the skill gap is a fun and innovative part of the game, similar to many aspects of Brood War play. This feels similar to when they changed the phoenix to attack while moving based on their interpretation of the community feedback and they totally dropped the ball on that one.
Late game PvZ is already looking pretty grim after the carrier nerf and if the oracles cannot properly defend a third, it seems P is going to revert to the days of 2-base all-ins as a standard PvZ game, which makes for an uninteresting e-sport to spectate and even less fun to play.
I would like to hear the thoughts of experienced players on this topic though.
|
On January 11 2019 21:10 Destructicon wrote:
Doodads are the small embellishments which can be added to maps for aesthetic reasons, like columns, trees, arches etc.
What the change means is that, up till now you had a much smaller cap on doodads. After this change you can put up to 100k on your map.
I don't think performance should be impacted unless a map maker really goes out of his way to add a lot of doodads, and even then I'm not sure.
Doodads can have a significant impact on performance, but it depends very much on which doodads are being used. You could destroy performance by stacking a small number of very computationally expensive doodads in an area.
All that being said I don't think this makes much of a difference for melee maps which typically don't have relatively all that many doodads (a few thousands maybe). This is probably a bigger change for arcade stuff.
And the oracle nerf is huge, and unfortunately feels like yet another nerf for protoss that is better for zerg than terran (whereas all the Protoss buffs are better against terran than zerg).
|
|
|
On January 12 2019 05:08 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2019 21:10 Destructicon wrote:
Doodads are the small embellishments which can be added to maps for aesthetic reasons, like columns, trees, arches etc.
What the change means is that, up till now you had a much smaller cap on doodads. After this change you can put up to 100k on your map.
I don't think performance should be impacted unless a map maker really goes out of his way to add a lot of doodads, and even then I'm not sure. Doodads can have a significant impact on performance, but it depends very much on which doodads are being used. You could destroy performance by stacking a small number of very computationally expensive doodads in an area. All that being said I don't think this makes much of a difference for melee maps which typically don't have relatively all that many doodads (a few thousands maybe). This is probably a bigger change for arcade stuff.
I imagine this is related to how some ladder maps can cause people with weaker computers to have framerate issues. For example, when I run a game on Stasis on my laptop, it averages about 10-15 FPS slower than on a less flashy looking map.
|
Go to reddit guys, IT WAS A BUG, and not inteded to work the way it did. The problem is that in units that usea beams the last hit is free so if your target the terrain with them the beam will automatically assign damage to the next unit righ after destroying the first one, making the last hit and first hit of the next unit almost at the same time. This phenomenon does not happen with manually targeted units. And to add, did someone really complained about Dark Templar?, for real?.
|
This may seem out of line with recent updates but is everyone ignoring the fact the BattleCruiser warp jump to "Unrevealled/seen" places on the map needs to be nerfed..? I mean its a standard item with unit, not even a upgrade like Yamoto Cannon and it's is way to OP.
|
Wasn't the game balanced around this bug and shouldn't they complansate this with buffing damage/speed accordingly?
|
Man, bummer. I was really hoping to gain some easy wins with mass ling floods. I feel like the bug is why mass oracles have been op against mass hydras for years.
Protoss would need another compensation, or would need to learn new builds.
I wish the game would be centered around ground units skirmishes more tho, in the zerg matchups at least its too air focused for T and P. Would be nice if players would trade units somewhat evenly in the early/mid game... like in broodwar 
Early bcs or banshes, early drops, early oracles and phoenixes. Its getting really annoying... now even ZvZ is almost always fast mutas.
|
Jesus i keep double posting meaning to edit a post and quoting instead, idk why we cant delete our own posts.. sorry i give up ill stop posting im just polluting this forum at this point.
|
Canada8991 Posts
On January 12 2019 09:10 Snakestyle11 wrote:
Jesus i keep double posting meaning to edit a post and quoting instead, idk why we cant delete our own posts.. sorry i give up ill stop posting im just polluting this forum at this point.
Wow, that double post. I hope you really feel bad about what you've done, you're lucky you didn't get insta ban.
+ Show Spoiler +Seriously tho it's all good, no one care. welcome to TL  And yes the "quote" and "edit" button are too close but I heard the TL staff are gonna fix it as soon as they finish the 2016 best games list
|
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something?
|
On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something?
The beam attacks ( oracles, sentries, void rays) currently ignore the attack cooldown on the first attack after they switch target ( i think). Which means in fights where they often switch target, they gain tremendus dps.
This is also why on paper hydras destroy oracles and void rays but in mass sometimes its completely one sided on the side of beam units ( many famous pvz offline mass oracle vs hydras had everyone confused)
|
On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something?
Yes, Oracles have significantly higher than expected DPS against groups of units, especially lower health units like workers and lings.
|
This nerf should be re applied after the upcoming tournament, but it should be compensated with both a Stalker buff and a Tempest nerf to make it less broken in TvT. Oracles are critical to Protoss securing bases and some form of map control against Zerg, so this heavy of a nerf (even if it is technically a bug fix) is going to really make securing a third a nightmare for Protoss. As a Zerg player, I'd say that in general, while Protoss air is almost unbeatable in high supply. the ground army feels incredibly weak.
I think this isbecause the Stalker more or less is useless and hilariously hard countered by mid game unit compositions like Roach/Hydra or MMM. I see a Protoss going for Stalkers early game and I already feel ahead, lings deal with them even with blink and Hydralisks of course murder them so badly. The Zealot is fine, the Sentry could also stand to probably be buffed up a bit but we'll stick with the Stalker.
It's probably time to just do an across the board nerf on Protoss air unit damage, but in return, I'd really appreciate it if Blizzard could make Protoss ground armies great again. The mass air thing is just so lame and it's just a testament to how sloppily the racial balance has been handled from the get go. I mean God what are we on, 2 or 3 Oracle redesigns, 2 or 3 Tempest redesigns, 3 or 4 Disruptor redesigns? I stand firm in my belief that Warp Gate had no place in the game to begin with, and that it's removal (although it's never EVER going to happen clearly if it hasn't happened now) or at least make it a mid game upgrade would make Protoss ground units far easier to balance.
|
On January 11 2019 21:10 Destructicon wrote:
Doodads are the small embellishments which can be added to maps for aesthetic reasons, like columns, trees, arches etc.
What the change means is that, up till now you had a much smaller cap on doodads. After this change you can put up to 100k on your map.
I don't think performance should be impacted unless a map maker really goes out of his way to add a lot of doodads, and even then I'm not sure.
How many could you place before that?
|
On January 12 2019 11:36 Snakestyle11 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something? The beam attacks ( oracles, sentries, void rays) currently ignore the attack cooldown on the first attack after they switch target ( i think). Which means in fights where they often switch target, they gain tremendus dps. This is also why on paper hydras destroy oracles and void rays but in mass sometimes its completely one sided on the side of beam units ( many famous pvz offline mass oracle vs hydras had everyone confused)
Why did it have to take 3 pages for someone to actually explain the bug?
It's a shame that TL doesn't actively try to write about these things, which are as important as player storylines.
|
On January 12 2019 17:16 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 11:36 Snakestyle11 wrote:On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something? The beam attacks ( oracles, sentries, void rays) currently ignore the attack cooldown on the first attack after they switch target ( i think). Which means in fights where they often switch target, they gain tremendus dps. This is also why on paper hydras destroy oracles and void rays but in mass sometimes its completely one sided on the side of beam units ( many famous pvz offline mass oracle vs hydras had everyone confused) Why did it have to take 3 pages for someone to actually explain the bug? It's a shame that TL doesn't actively try to write about these things, which are as important as player storylines.
There was a popular video explaining it a few weeks back.
Honestly I can't believe people are defending it. It gives the oracle a free attack when switching targets. It completely removes the attack delay between shots after killing a unit. That's not "Oh the unit was balanced around it", that's "The oracle has been a in a state of contention since it's release, and we've finally figured out *why*"
|
19533 Posts
On January 12 2019 20:37 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 17:16 opisska wrote:On January 12 2019 11:36 Snakestyle11 wrote:On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something? The beam attacks ( oracles, sentries, void rays) currently ignore the attack cooldown on the first attack after they switch target ( i think). Which means in fights where they often switch target, they gain tremendus dps. This is also why on paper hydras destroy oracles and void rays but in mass sometimes its completely one sided on the side of beam units ( many famous pvz offline mass oracle vs hydras had everyone confused) Why did it have to take 3 pages for someone to actually explain the bug? It's a shame that TL doesn't actively try to write about these things, which are as important as player storylines. There was a popular video explaining it a few weeks back. Honestly I can't believe people are defending it. It gives the oracle a free attack when switching targets. It completely removes the attack delay between shots after killing a unit. That's not "Oh the unit was balanced around it", that's "The oracle has been a in a state of contention since it's release, and we've finally figured out *why*"
No that is absolutely "it was balanced around it". The game isn't (only) balanced around the actual unit numbers in a vacuum, it is balanced around the actual unit performances seen in the games. Even if it means that the theoretical analysis of oracle vs X would have been off, the actual games we had played in the meantime were considered fine in relation to the oracle.
Now i would totally prefer an oracle which doesn't kill an entire worker line in seconds when there is nothign to defend it, but that's not the game sc2 is and has to be with current unit interactions and matchup blueprints.
|
On January 12 2019 20:37 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 17:16 opisska wrote:On January 12 2019 11:36 Snakestyle11 wrote:On January 12 2019 10:41 col_jung wrote:
Can someone explain to me why this is a "bug"?
Does the current attack mechanic of the Oracle contradict the advertised DPS or something? The beam attacks ( oracles, sentries, void rays) currently ignore the attack cooldown on the first attack after they switch target ( i think). Which means in fights where they often switch target, they gain tremendus dps. This is also why on paper hydras destroy oracles and void rays but in mass sometimes its completely one sided on the side of beam units ( many famous pvz offline mass oracle vs hydras had everyone confused) Why did it have to take 3 pages for someone to actually explain the bug? It's a shame that TL doesn't actively try to write about these things, which are as important as player storylines. There was a popular video explaining it a few weeks back. Honestly I can't believe people are defending it. It gives the oracle a free attack when switching targets. It completely removes the attack delay between shots after killing a unit. That's not "Oh the unit was balanced around it", that's "The oracle has been a in a state of contention since it's release, and we've finally figured out *why*"
Except it actually was balanced around it because units are balanced based on how they perform in tournament settings. Who knows if the dps nerf that made Marines and SCVs take 3 shots to kill instead of 2 would have been necessary if the Oracle had not been bugged? Also, I figured the Starcraft community of all communities would understand bugs being part of balance, considering Brood War. I mean, I guess they should scrub that game clean of those game-changing bugs based on your logic. The game hasn't been balanced around those bugs, all of those units have just been in contention for years now. Now, you wouldn't disagree with this statement and contradict yourself, would you?
|
Everyone here is talking about "Bug", but is it really?
Sure, the actual DPS dealt by units with beam attacks is a bit bigger depending on the HP of the target than the theoretical value calculated from the formula DPS = Damage / Cooldown. But these units don't become suddenly OP, because they were balanced on their actual performances in the game.
There is no any erratic behavior in the beam weapon mechanic (the case where you break through shield batteries is another separate bug not directly related to beam weapons) and if you look again at the video demonstration in the first post, doesn't old oracle weapon feel more natural in the sense that it actualy simulates constant beam, rather than new one? Don't you think original developers conceived it this way?
And lastly, let's take a look at the definition of "bug": an error in a computer program or system (according to Oxford dictionary). Thus, to know for sure we have to ask the guys who originaly worked on SC2 9 years ago whether it is "bug" or a feature of the beam weapon, because present team working on the game already discredited itself several times by being clueless about what actually is going on in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
