|
On July 14 2009 01:54 OgerAffe wrote:
hf finding this source :D
your wrong.
I just misread it is all. I forgot they only removed the pylon power/supply from it to reduce its effectiveness. You can see the Psi Storm quote I was thinking of, though.
The Dark Pylon is now known as the Obelisk – primarily because it no longer cloaks units and no longer provides pylon power/supply. This change was mostly due to balance, since it is relatively easy to spam Dark Pylons everywhere and instantly have a Psi Storm recharge point to decimate incoming forces.
|
Ugh, am I the only one that hates MULEs and Proton Charge? It seems like pointless clicking to me, no strategy involved, no reason involved other than 'we have to do this to make players come back to base and click.'
I would much rather they do something innovative, like building linking. That is, you click one building and drag through some nearby buildings to do something. I have no idea what, but if you had several things possible with that and had to do it for each new unit, well hell there's some macro that offers choice, takes some time and skill, and MATTERS, unlike proton charge, which is just an APM eater.
|
On July 14 2009 03:55 garmule2 wrote:
I would much rather they do something innovative, like building linking. That is, you click one building and drag through some nearby buildings to do something. I have no idea what, but if you had several things possible with that and had to do it for each new unit, well hell there's some macro that offers choice, takes some time and skill, and MATTERS, unlike proton charge, which is just an APM eater.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=78657
|
On July 14 2009 03:55 garmule2 wrote:
Ugh, am I the only one that hates MULEs and Proton Charge? It seems like pointless clicking to me, no strategy involved, no reason involved other than 'we have to do this to make players come back to base and click.'
Well ideally, its an additional strategy to manage "macro energy" which can be used for economic boosts OR something else useful.
This requires that the reason you use/don't use a macro mechanic is based on what the best use of energy is at that time (based on your economic output, strategic/tactical situation, etc.)
Currently the long cooldowns, and non stackability force it into more of a pointless clicking, but I am hopeful that Blizzard will fix this mistake, like they did the "gas shutdown+reactivate" mechanic.
I do agree some type of building linking concept would be good, BUT chances are you would have just as much incentive to "set up connections" and just leave them going. Which means it would have just as much reason to be 'autocastable' in that sense. Also it would be MUCH harder to design and balance.
As for the current abilities on the Obelisk, Karune recently said that they kept both the recharge abilities, They just changed the ratio. (recharge Shields at 1:1, Energy at 1:2...... where the second number is the Obelisk energy)
I personally think they should change the Rate rather than the Ratio to balance it, but that's because that would also help balance a 'shared pool'
As to the Teleport idea: timed cooldowns seemed like they could make it difficult to properly move it around to service multiple bases (as needed), and energy costs might significantly affect its ability to use other abilities.. So a proposal.
The "Teleport" costs Shield energy.
1. This recharges fast and does Not overlap with the normal energy costs
2. This means that an Obelisk under attack can lose the ability to teleport
say ~100 shields, which must be full energy to allow it to teleport.
Another idea is to give it a slightly higher shield:hp ratio, and Teleport eliminates the shields as a side effect (like Dark Archon Mind Control) That way there is a Risk teleporting it into battle.
Or simply require full shields for it to Teleport (and keep it an energy cost)
|
The building linking would be a nice idea with more space imo, it worked really well in Supreme Commander (PURE macro game) As depending on how your base was set up would change the efficiency and cost of units and construction.
I can't really see it working in the fast paced SC though, it would be nice to give more options to the pro macroers out there.
|
I think Protoss Warp-In and Zerg's Creep drop/Nydus Worms are already good non-economy based macro mechanics. I'm of the belief that macro doesn't have to be linked with economy, mostly multitasking. I just don't think Warp-In and Creep drop/Nydus Worm/Creep related strategies have been used to their fullest to see their macro potential. If only Terran had an upgrade to be able to build and store 1 unit while lifted off encourages base movement macro.
Macro based Protoss players would be able to time their warp-ins and manage the cooldowns of multiple Warpgates and manage Warp-In spots with Pylons/Prisms at a constant basis.
Zerg macro players could paint the map purple with multiple overlords in multiple locations with overseers summoning nydus worms on them while relocating his armies at different nydus worms for good flanks. He could also fortify creep spots with an overlord carrying a queen to place creep tumors and drones to morph to spine crawlers.
Notice how both macro mechanics are available at Tier 2. Warp-In at Cyber core and Creep Drop/Overseers/Nydus Network after Lair. Its like a steady progression. By tier 2 MBS and new UI features would make it easy, so they add new mechanics and options in tier 2 to enhanced your play and keep you occupied.
|
Karune recently answered some questions about the Obelisk so ill post them here
ArcherofAiur:
Also, how effective are the Obelisk's Shield and Energy Recharge abilities?
Karune:
The Obelisk's shield regeneration is currently at a 1:1 ratio and the energy transfer ability is at a 2:1 ratio (Obelisk energy to unit casting energy). These ratios are of course subject to balance. Originally, the energy transfer ability was at a 1:1 and that proved to be much too easy to fire off consecutive Psi Storms on incoming enemies while defending and attacking.
ArcherofAiur:
Are the Shield and Energy Recharge abilities useful enough of the time to compete with Proton Charge?
There is allot of concern that they may not be as good an alternative as say comsat is to MULE.
Karune:
In my opinion, both recharge abilities are very useful, but often times it is better to build a second Obelisk when you can afford it to then use those abilities. If you are 100% efficient with probe buff, your first Obelisk should never have extra energy for the use of other abilities.
|
Thoughts on the problems with the macro mechanics
The issue is the difficulty in getting "maximum benefit" from a particular macro mechanic.
With MULEs its easy assuming there is no significant coodown. whenever you want to take the time, spend all the energy you have calling down MULEs.
(sooner is better ONLY for the reason that Minerals now is better than Minerals Later).. but you can get all the minerals you have energy for at the time you get them
With Spawn Larva, assuming multiple Spawn Larvas are allowed on the same Hatchery simultaneously.
(sooner is better ONLY for the reason that Larva now is better than Larva later)...again.. all the Larva you have energy for you can get.
In both of those cases, the energy is the ONLY limiting factor.
With Proton charge, there is a maximum benefit. Once a Mineral Line is fully loaded, and you have enough energy to keep it at continuous charge, no more energy is useful. So you need to be able to spend exactly that amount of energy. This requires complex timing, clicking on the ability Exactly every 30 sec. (asuming that is the duration) unless
1) You have stackability (each casting adds time) (so if I add more energy early, I still get the full value from it, because it still adds the same 30 sec.)
AND
2) You have some additional Obelisk energy to allow for some stacking.
A solution then, is
1) Allow Stacking the duration of the Charges
AND
2) make it so you will Usually have too much or too little energy
for how to do #2, consider the current case.
1-200 mineral Obelisk can maintain 1 mineral line Proton Charge continuously. Assuming that is balanced, then what I propose is
change the cost of the Obelisk so that it is not a small # ratio... ie
a certain # of Obelisks will be too few for your # of mineral lines, but one more will be too many
ie 1 can't support it but 2 is too many
so for example, if a 50 energy cost Proton Charge lasting 30 sec. can be continuously cast
One Option
make it 80 energy cost for 30 sec.
1 Obelisk not enough for 1 mineral line
2 Obelisks more than enough for 1 mineral line, not enough for 2 mineral lines
4 Obelisks more than enough for 2 mineral lines, not enough for 3 mineral lines
5 Obelisks more than enough for 3 mineral lines, not enough for 4 mineral lines
7 Obelisks more than enough for 4 mineral lines, not enough for 5 mineral lines
8 Obelisks exactly enough for 5 mineral lines
However, 5 Mineral lines isn't a big portion of the game time, so most of the time you either have some extra energy, or all of your energy can easily be spent because Proton Charge runs out.
In this case, because you need 8 Obelisks for 5 Mineral Lines, they should be cheaper (only 125 instead of 200 minerals) and because you need more than 1 per mineral line, they should probably be Energy Pool based (1 by each of 5 mineral lines, and 3 extras somewhere on the map)
Shield/Energy Recharging abilities would need their ratios+rates adjusted down for balance.
Another option
Give the Obelisk Teleport to Pylon Power on a cooldown and Proton Charge 40 energy cost for 60 sec.
0 Obelisks not enough for 1 mineral line
1 Obelisks more than enough for 2 mineral lines, not enough for 3 mineral lines
2 Obelisks exactly enough for 5 mineral lines
In this case, because you only need 2 Obelisks for 5 mineral lines, they should be more expensive (500 instead of 200 minerals)
Shield/Energy Recharging abilities would need their ratios+rates adjusted up for balance.
In Both cases allow stacking of the duration of Proton Charge.
|
With the mule. I believe the supply depot upgrade is the most ecconomical of the two abilities. It doubles the unit cap capacity of a depot for the same energy cost as a dropped mule (50e). This is a saving of 100minerals. The mule can collect from a crystal at the same time as a worker, but to collect 100minerals (@6 minerals per trip) it will have to make 17 round trips in its lifetime (which i don't believe it can with its current duration but I need confirmation on that.
-Supply Depot(50e); instant saving of 100minerals; risky as the supply can be destroyed
-Mule(50e); gradual saving of (less?)?minerals; less risky;can also be used for scouting
The determining factors for OC savings are (a)energy (b)risk assessment and choice
Spawn lava has a 'growth duration'. So you have to consider both the energy reserved and the growth duration. One queen will generate more energy per min than it takes to cast spawn lava every time its available. The limiting factor of this ability is time not energy.
|
On July 15 2009 10:20 DeCoup wrote:
Spawn lava has a 'growth duration'. So you have to consider both the energy reserved and the growth duration. One queen will generate more energy per min than it takes to cast spawn lava every time its available. The limiting factor of this ability is time not energy.
In which case it should be changed.
|
Honestly, what it sounds like to me is that you're just trying to beat around the fact you want it buffed. Essentially, you want the obelisk to be exactly the same as it is now, but with a teleport ability. It might make it more interesting, but you don't offer any nerfs along with it as well. It just sounds like a "let's give obelisk teleport." =/
|
On July 15 2009 11:44 FabledIntegral wrote:
Honestly, what it sounds like to me is that you're just trying to beat around the fact you want it buffed. Essentially, you want the obelisk to be exactly the same as it is now, but with a teleport ability. It might make it more interesting, but you don't offer any nerfs along with it as well. It just sounds like a "let's give obelisk teleport." =/
I dont think any of the abilities need to be nerfed. I think the recharge abilities need to be made more viable. I also think there should be position based decision making.
my proposal to accomplish both these things is, wait for it....
lets give obelisk teleport 
|
On July 15 2009 12:38 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2009 11:44 FabledIntegral wrote:
Honestly, what it sounds like to me is that you're just trying to beat around the fact you want it buffed. Essentially, you want the obelisk to be exactly the same as it is now, but with a teleport ability. It might make it more interesting, but you don't offer any nerfs along with it as well. It just sounds like a "let's give obelisk teleport." =/
I dont think any of the abilities need to be nerfed. I think the other abilities need to be made more viable. I also think there should be position based decision making.
Isn't there already a degree of positional decision making since you have to choose whether you put one at your mineral lines for proton charge, at your choke for shield/energy recharge, or as a proxy for a stronger push/contain? If the Obelisk can't move, then you would really have to decide whether you want to commit the resources to them or not.
If you really want the Obelisk to be able to teleport around, I'd give the teleportation a mineral cost instead of an energy cost. I think that makes sense since you're spending minerals to warp it to the battlefield from Shakuras (or wherever) in the first place. I really don't think it's necessary for all three races to have mobile buildings though.
By the way, do you know if Obelisks require pylon power now that they don't supply their own?
|
On July 15 2009 13:22 AeTheReal wrote:
Isn't there already a degree of positional decision making since you have to choose whether you put one at your mineral lines for proton charge, at your choke for shield/energy recharge, or as a proxy for a stronger push/contain? If the Obelisk can't move, then you would really have to decide whether you want to commit the resources to them or not.
You bring up a very good point. Yes the Obelisk does require position based decisions when first making it. However after this point there are no further position based decisions to be made (other than maybe where to cast shield recharge in a battle). Proton Charge, although requireing a AoE targeting action from the player, has no postion based decision.
On July 15 2009 13:22 AeTheReal wrote:
By the way, do you know if Obelisks require pylon power now that they don't supply their own?
Yes it does. I am assuming that like all protoss buildings if it loses pylon power it powers down.
|
Protoss are already very positional as they are.
-The Nullifiers shields Force Field allows it to force the enemy to go where the protoss want them to go (because they path they would have taken is sealed) or not go where they don't want them to go.
-The HT time-warp (or whatever its called now) makes the enemy very slow, keeping them in their current position
-The Phoenix anti-gravity can take units out of play (or more to the point lift them out of the way to prevent blocking of paths).
-The motherships vortex can render certain paths nonviable for up to 45 seconds, and can teleport to any location with a friendly Protoss building (rendering everything in teh area cloaked as a bonus)
-The stalker can use blink to give it a position advantage (be it out of range, moving to high ground, or for general travel)
-The colossus can travel over most obstacles (units) and up cliffs.
And the warp prism and warp-in mechanics...
The Protoss can make armies very quickly anywhere on the map, and they can control both their access and the enemy's access (or lack their of) to many positions on the play field. Protoss are map control.
I personally don't think they need to add more mechanics to give even more of their abilities a positional use, they have enough. It would also render all three mechanics to be very similar, diluting the uniqueness of each race that they are so openly hoping to achieve. I vote no change.
+ Show Spoiler +Not to mention that teleporting to pylon power would give more shield recharge and mana batteries to the already mobile army.. and have you considered the effect that a teleportable building would have on the existing teleport ability of the mothership? You would be able to use oblisks to allow motherships to warp to areas with no pre-existing buildings.
|
I would make it so that each of the three abilities of the Obelisk requires a (low) fixed activation cost and then replenishes energy/shield/"drone speed" in a given AOE. Drones get an speed/energy bar which allows them to harvest more minerals as long as there is energy left and is consumed over time.
In my eyes this would make the three abilities "consistent" in the sense that the mechanic is similar and it allows for a lot of timing options (wait for accumulated energy to power up a lot of drones at once) or spam it to keep a smaller number of drones going (in the long run losing on the "activation cost"). In addition it nicely solves the "stacking problem" since multiple obelisks can be used to replenish energy bars to max at any given time, while (except for activation costs) consuming an amount of energy proportional to the replenished speed/shield etc.
P.S.: First post ftw!
|
On July 15 2009 14:36 DeCoup wrote:
I personally don't think they need to add more mechanics to give even more of their abilities a positional use, they have enough. It would also render all three mechanics to be very similar, diluting the uniqueness of each race that they are so openly hoping to achieve. I vote no change.
Not to mention that teleporting to pylon power would give more shield recharge and mana batteries to the already mobile army.. and have you considered the effect that a teleportable building would have on the existing teleport ability of the mothership? You would be able to use oblisks to allow motherships to warp to areas with no pre-existing buildings.
Only by using a Warp Prism (since the Obelisk would have to teleport to Pylon Power), there would normally already be a building anywhere it is.
But that is an additional argument for Shared Pool (which yes that is a buff, but balanced by a smaller cap, ie 100 per Obelisk instead of 200, also balanced by a decrease in the rate that energy can be extracted from it for Shield and Energy Recharge.
The argument there is that the positional decisions are
1. where to place the Obelisks,
2. which Obelisk to use
|
|
|
Ah man, I guess the benefit of these spam bots is they revive these ludicrous time capsules. I had no freaking idea this was ever a thing.
|
Same here, I was reading this thinking "WTF is even that?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
