|
On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range.
marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units?
Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm....
Now what about charging zealots? hmmm.......
|
On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm.......
The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw.
|
On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw.
You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems?
and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash.
|
On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash.
Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version.
Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units.
|
On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units.
What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines.
What counters Zealots... Vultures
What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels
What counters Dark Templar... Vultures.
That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game?
The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings.
|
On July 19 2008 01:48 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units. What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines. What counters Zealots... Vultures What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels What counters Dark Templar... Vultures. That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game? The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings.
No matter what you say the thor is a walking wall with its 300+300hh, 3 base armor and self repair, adding another walking wall wont make the concept any more interesting.
And actually stimmed marines do counter zerglings hard while firebats only counters zerglings eventhough they do it better but since they only counter lings they are useless compared to marines.
Also marines + marauders will counter all of those mentioned units, add in a ghost or two to counter zealots. And if you want the ultimate counter for all of the above mentioned melee units, build a damn banshee, they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG and thus will slaughter the melee units that can't fight back.
Trust me, a unit whose only role is to be a walking wall is the worst concept ever, and the current terran have no problems with melee units...
If you read what people have said marauders + marines pwn melee units.
|
On July 19 2008 03:00 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2008 01:48 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 01:00 Klockan3 wrote:On July 19 2008 00:34 Caller wrote:On July 19 2008 00:12 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 23:59 Caller wrote:On July 18 2008 20:21 Klockan3 wrote:On July 18 2008 13:35 Caller wrote:
Terrans have a need for units that can directly counter melee attacks. It used to be the firebat, but without the firebat and the addition of the marauder, and the loss of mines, an anti-melee unit (besides the jackal, which is questionable) is needed.
Marauders are a direct counter to melee attack, since the weakness of melee is that they can't attack if they are not in range and marauders keeps them at range. marauders are expensive, and are you telling me that it is now required that terrans build marauders for all matchups to deal with melee units? Besides, 100/25 maruader = 4 zerglings. It can only shoot one zergling at a time. Hmmmmmmmm.... Now what about charging zealots? hmmm....... The slow is aoe and they cost 150/50. Atleast in the wwi build´, and this makes them perfect to counter melee units. Charging zealots gets slowed to normal zealot speed btw. You still haven't addressed my concern that we will essentially be required to build marauders for every single matchup. That's really, really boring. If it was a choice, like vultures or firebats or even tanks (SK terran?) then it would be ok. But why do we have to build marauders with any unit in order to do anything against melee units, it seems? and in any case did you actually look at the idea, it seems far more terranesque than a marine with bash. Um, you can counter melee units with air units, with a large enough concentration of marines, with thors since thors now already are walking walls, with siegetanks to blast them before they get close, snipe them with ghosts, blow them up with mines, scorch them with jackals.., with anything really. Why do you need another moving wall? Thors are already perfect walking walls with a lot more character than your version. Terran have no problems with melee units in sc1, and they hardly ever uses firebats already since marine packs does everything firebats do but also hits air and do good damage to other stuff than small melee units. What counters Zerglings... Firebats, not stimmed marines. What counters Zealots... Vultures What counters Ultralisks... Science Vessels What counters Dark Templar... Vultures. That's funny, why are all of the left units and none of the right units in the game? The problem with the Thor is that it's not meant to be a walking wall but an artillery platform. It's redundant and nearly everybody agrees that the current build is lackluster. And sure you can have all those units, but then you could also say that tanks can always defeat zerglings b/c tanks can splash and kill many lings. No matter what you say the thor is a walking wall with its 300+300hh, 3 base armor and self repair, adding another walking wall wont make the concept any more interesting. And actually stimmed marines do counter zerglings hard while firebats only counters zerglings eventhough they do it better but since they only counter lings they are useless compared to marines. Also marines + marauders will counter all of those mentioned units, add in a ghost or two to counter zealots. And if you want the ultimate counter for all of the above mentioned melee units, build a damn banshee, they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG and thus will slaughter the melee units that can't fight back. Trust me, a unit whose only role is to be a walking wall is the worst concept ever, and the current terran have no problems with melee units... If you read what people have said marauders + marines pwn melee units.
Thors are too unwieldy to use as walls because they are too slow and expensive. Walls are supposed to be cheap and expendable, not more expensive than the units they are protecting. Not to mention that Thors are at the top of the tech chain, and well... that doesn't make much sense for a wall.
The Cossack is not quite just a walking wall. It's a cavalry unit that can deploy into a wall, like the opposite of a siege tank. If you read the unit specifications there would be two things that stick out:
A) It is a fast "walker" unit that has a relatively fast but low damage attack. As such, it can be used to harass enemy units like for instance a group of zerglings that is moving about trying to flank or immortals that are being warped in in a small protoss encamptment. They somewhat function as mobile turrets, giving you a counter against light air that isn't infantry based as well. Worker harass will be far more difficult as only two can fit in a dropship at a time, the damage is too low to wipe out probes quickly, and they are expensive for worker harass.
B)Another use, though, is in conjunction with jackals in order to flank an enemy force, or to deflect a flank. A group of dug-in Cossacks can create small chokepoints that the Jackals can abuse with their linear splash while the Cossacks absorb Hydralisk/Stalker fire. But if a Terran ball is being attacked on two sides, whereas Thors will have a difficult time trudging into proper positions, Cossacks, with their quick speed, can quickly shift positions and save at least part of the ball from being ripped to shreds.
Addressing your points:
Again, you say to fight those units we need Marine Marauder. Well, I don't want to have to build Marine Marauder in every single game, and have to tech two different ways (infantry and mech) as a result, especially with the new gas system..
And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them.
|
Idea to make the game macro harder to master without using artificial blocks. Focusing o natural gameplay enhancement like Mutate Larvae and Reactor:
- Protoss:
Probes can build a super pylon in addition to normal pylons. These super pylons are temporary. Provides the same aura normal pylons does. Plus their aura increases the production speed of production buildings (or cooldown of warp gates) by 25%ish per super pylon. Up to 100% (x2 faster production or 1/2 build time).
- Terran:
Reactors increase production speed by 50% instead of 100%. But they cost 50% their old price and you can use up to 4 reactors per production building (total 200% speed increase, 3x faster or 1/3 build time).
- Zerg
Mutate Larvae can also be used on drones. Mutating it back to a larvae which can then be used to produce another unit. (basically sacrificing workers to produce combat units faster without needing to build more hatcheries)
|
Ok, this has been a nagging me for a long time. I don't know what to do... it's such a simple fix... how can I make Blizzard listen? Oh, the frustration! *cries* Please, somebody with authority, make them listen... they MUST listen! *cries some more*
Move the health bars from the units' heads to the units' feet!
It looked great in Starcraft. I don't understand why they didn't do that in WC3, because it looks like shit (like in all RTS games with flying health bars). They're so simple to move, and have such a great visual impact. The guy or gal who knew that must've moved out from Blizzard when they began making WoW (where head health bars make more sense).
|
On July 25 2008 07:12 jeb wrote:
Ok, this has been a nagging me for a long time. I don't know what to do... it's such a simple fix... how can I make Blizzard listen? Oh, the frustration! *cries* Please, somebody with authority, make them listen... they MUST listen! *cries some more*
Move the health bars from the units' heads to the units' feet!
It looked great in Starcraft. I don't understand why they didn't do that in WC3, because it looks like shit (like in all RTS games with flying health bars). They're so simple to move, and have such a great visual impact. The guy or gal who knew that must've moved out from Blizzard when they began making WoW (where head health bars make more sense).
I share your preference but I dont think it's a huge issue. What I'm more annoyed about is how the whole scheme of what is shown is war3 verbatim. Keep the health bar on your selected units visible without holding alt please.
Another thing, with the subgroups, please allow me to explicitly select a unit from the selected units display with a single click...
|
United States43219 Posts
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
On July 27 2008 16:10 Kwark wrote:
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
So that's only for hot keyed gates or if you drag-box and select multiple gates? I thought the latest version played at Paris was where you had to go 1zzzzz?
|
On July 27 2008 16:10 Kwark wrote:
I don't know if this has been suggested before because I normally avoid the sc2 forum and MBS topics in particular. However this thought just came to me and I thought it was worth suggesting.
Firstly, scrap tab mbs. It's just another forced handicap on the UI.
Replace it with a penalty on attempting to build units you can't afford. Basically just make the gateway busy for the build time of whatever it is you asked it to build but couldn't afford. If you have the money for 5 gates but only have 3 or so then you won't notice this at all, you'll go 1z and 3 zealots will appear but you'll still be macroing badly. Conversely if you make 8 gateways and go 1z it'll make the 5 zealots you can afford but all 8 gateways will be busy for the time taken to make the zealots.
It should encourage a player to interact more with the game, be aware of how macro concepts work and how to play efficiently. A player who can macro well in bw will never run into this problem, a bad player who likes being able to macro with just 2 keystrokes can macro with 2 keystrokes and to hell with production efficiency.
If it's been suggested before, sorry. If not, any thoughts or criticisms?
Criticism: Effecient macro will still allow a skillful player to have near perfect macro without returning to base, leading to the stagnation and overconcentration on micro, death of multi-tasking, etc etc
|
OK, here's the idea.
What if we give tier 2 zerg queen ability to spawn 2 scourge which last X seconds.
-This will give zerg good counter against medivac, phase prism, overlord+worm drops and banshees, phoenix, collosus.
-Emphasize queens role as a defensive unit.
-Shouldn't affect mid-late game air battles.
-May give cheap and fast scouting for zerg.
-May complicate scouting/detection for protoss.
-ZvZ may become an overlord slaughter.
|
On July 29 2008 15:59 Kad3Ch wrote:
OK, here's the idea.
What if we give tier 2 zerg queen ability to spawn 2 scourge which last X seconds.
-This will give zerg good counter against medivac, phase prism, overlord+worm drops and banshees, phoenix, collosus.
-Emphasize queens role as a defensive unit.
-Shouldn't affect mid-late game air battles.
-May give cheap and fast scouting for zerg.
-May complicate scouting/detection for protoss.
-ZvZ may become an overlord slaughter.
This is actually pretty cool, and makes a lot of sense.
|
On July 25 2008 03:28 VIB wrote:
Idea to make the game macro harder to master without using artificial blocks. Focusing o natural gameplay enhancement like Mutate Larvae and Reactor:
- Protoss:
Probes can build a super pylon in addition to normal pylons. These super pylons are temporary. Provides the same aura normal pylons does. Plus their aura increases the production speed of production buildings (or cooldown of warp gates) by 25%ish per super pylon. Up to 100% (x2 faster production or 1/2 build time).
- Terran:
Reactors increase production speed by 50% instead of 100%. But they cost 50% their old price and you can use up to 4 reactors per production building (total 200% speed increase, 3x faster or 1/3 build time).
- Zerg
Mutate Larvae can also be used on drones. Mutating it back to a larvae which can then be used to produce another unit. (basically sacrificing workers to produce combat units faster without needing to build more hatcheries)
your zerg idea is bad but the others are even worse.
Previously Posted:
"And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them."
I'm sure he meant something more like, build guardians, ultralisks can't kill them.
|
On July 29 2008 22:47 dcttr66 wrote:
Previously Posted:
"And the banshee is, again, much later tech than zealots+ zerglings, and its expensive, and its next to useless against hydras/stalkers which are assuredly going to be in most armies. That's like saying build Wraiths, Ultralisks can't kill them."
I'm sure he meant something more like, build guardians, ultralisks can't kill them.
no im saying how its like "banshees are air, zealots cant attack air, use banshees against zealots." is like wraiths vs. ultras.
|
actually he said this "they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG"
and wraiths do not do this so like i said, it's more like guardians.
i mean, really, the ultralisks are stronger than the zealots and the wraiths are weaker than the banshees so why are you exaggerating like this?
it's like you're saying that killing a fruit fly is the same as killing a fish. neither of them can fight back.
it sounds like you want zealots to attack air.
|
After lurking for some time though teamliquid i decided to post my own idea
Right now the Nydus worm must be built on creep, making it almost exacltly like a nydus canal, it nerfs the wrom so the zerg can't just make 7 worms in terran/protoss without warning, but it doesn't fix the problem when attacking another zerg, and remains inbalanced anytime a zerg fights another zerg... right?
So, my sugestion is basicaly to restrict how fast nydus worms can be built in a certian time using either cooldown or energy from the nydus warren (or is it called nydus network? can't remember)
-You can only build 1 Nydus warren(/Network?), but once it is destroyed it may be rebuilt, but you'll lose all units within it. The nydus warren has 250 energy (maybe +50 with some reserch?) and each worm costs around 150 energy. (or just give it a cooldown, i like the energy idea best tho)
-Nydus worms can spawn anywere with vision, but their build time is incresed (6-7 secs?) also a Nydus worm can be moved, this will cost the Nydus warren some energy but the worm will be able to move anywere were there is vision.
-You can also build Nydus canals that will work much like thouse in SC1, but instead of having to build an exit they will conect to the nydus network.
|
On July 30 2008 09:58 dcttr66 wrote:
actually he said this "they do extremely high damage for their cost as an ATG"
and wraiths do not do this so like i said, it's more like guardians.
i mean, really, the ultralisks are stronger than the zealots and the wraiths are weaker than the banshees so why are you exaggerating like this?
it's like you're saying that killing a fruit fly is the same as killing a fish. neither of them can fight back.
it sounds like you want zealots to attack air.
no, i'm saying that just because a unit can't attack air doesn't mean that air units are a good counter for it. Please read the actual thing.
Sure, banshees do more damage to ground, but why are you wasting banshees to kill zealots anyways when they could be raping probes? or buildings? or... w/e?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
