| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
Spider mines are bugged so they don't attack lings. edit:Or lings are bugged. They don't trigger null's either. Null Wards don't shoot properly. They'll shoot at a drone that is stationary and still miss. Might have to do with it being a flying unit or something. | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
| ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
edit: eu went to bed, stream over | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
They are full of bugs T_T They shoot in random directions, the damage is not always dealt. If I get time tomorrow I will try to fix it. @Spider mines vs Zerglings Wat? It is still bugged? I fixed it with yesterdays patch, tried it in the editor and Zerglings seemed to trigger Spider mines just fine. @Solid + Show Spoiler + I think I am just horrible at explaining my intentions and what I try to reach, by adding the Immortal/Marauder. : / I think we see this in a very different way. I agree that the metagame, strategies and multitasking skills etc players use play an important role. We can not detail design everything. But that is not what I, we, you, all of us are trying to do. I will try and clarify my stance on some of the points you made: Also you cannot force multitasking in a game by design, if 2 players wish to sit on their asses till lategame and focus on their build instead of microing drops/banshees/ w/e, then you wont see action. I assume players play the game with the intention to win. All I can do via the design is make sure that fun and interesting play-styles are better and more efficent compared to "boring" play styles. IF the best "strategy" is to turtle the whole game and push out with a large army 20 minutes into the game, then players will do so. Especially if that helps them to win the game. That is why I have tried to punish deathball play, punish turtle play, encourage multitasking, encourage harassment, encourage smaller skirmishes... Since day one of Starbow... I can not force anything. I can only encourage it. Why can this not be done via design? Isn´t that what we do and have done all the time? O_O The last deciding factor for a game is balance. What you guys have been doing waay to much is looking at games, pointing out some games and saying 'race X wins that too much, this is a balance problem', the marauder and the immortal are not needed imo, just because the player playing race X was outperforming the other one in one of the topics (which can differ every game) doesn't mean that the balance (or the gamedesign) is at fault. But this is not what I do at all.................................. Or anyone in this thread? The balance is not the major concern. The problem is NOT that a race wins too much. The problem is HOW races win. For example: You mention in your text that it is incredible lame to watch WoL Terran just A-move and kill Protoss at the 10 minute mark with a bio ball. You seem to consider that a problem since it creates lame gameplay. In the same way, I try to design/shape what I consider problems in the Starbow match-ups. I do NOT mean only balance problems. Rather game dynamic problems - aka, stuff that leads to boring gameplay. @SmileZerg + Show Spoiler + On July 13 2013 06:34 SmileZerg wrote: Someone please describe for me, if you will, the intended role(s) of the Sentinel, particularly in PvZ? General purposes the Sentinel is suppose to fullfill for the Protoss player: - A unit used to gain area control via Null Ward. - A unit used to help supporting assaults at heavily defended locations via Safeguard. - A unit that offers map presence, early harassment potential, helps to secure expansions. Specific purposes of the Sentinel in PvZ: - Null Ward is useful both vs Hydras and Mutalisks, and those two units are arguably the most dangerous threat in ZvP early/midgame. Protoss has a hard time to be prepared vs both types of units. The Sentinel can be used vs both units, if Protoss is clever and uses the Null wards well. - Helps Protoss to secure the crucial third base around 9-12 minute mark. Atm, only Gateway units seems to be weak doing so alone. Reavers are quite high up on the tech tree. - Offers scouting/harassment potential and map presence vs Zerg, early in the game Game dynamics the Sentinel is supposed to enhance: - More early aggression/action - More positional play (Null Ward) - Punish turtle play, since Protoss can now attack "unattackable" locations with Safeguard, just as Dark Swarm and to some degree Nerve Jammer can do. @Immortal/Marauder + Show Spoiler + People keep telling me they are not necessary or needed. Starbow was fine without them. We all have a different view on what "fine" means. We all have different views on what a good RTS game should include. A year ago, people wondered why I still worked on Starbow. Everything was already fine with it. Lots of good stuff we have today in the game was unnecessary/not needed when first added. I just want to clarify: It really is not about what is needed. A lot of stuff are not needed. Everything I do aims to improve the gameplay in a couple of ways: - Make the game more fun, exciting, dynamic, interesting, varied, deep, bla bla bla. Sometimes I use my ideas, but most often I use stuff from this thread. Sometimes it works out well in the game. Sometimes not. The Marauder/Immortal are just tools we can use to improve the gameplay in different ways. Without them I really do not see any solution to the following problems: + Show Spoiler + - How can we balance Marines/Bio so they ARE NOT TOTALLY WORTHLESS in TvT and TvP, while at the same time NOT be too strong vs Zerg? How can we make a Marine actually be worth to build vs Terran, when a Vulture for 25 more minerals, just kills them in 3-shots and have superior advantages? Why would someone get them vs Protoss when they are so easily slaughtered and cost inefficent, compared to pure mech? Also, what different gamy dynamics do we get if a player uses Marines + Medics, instead of mech? Nothing. Protoss uses the same units vs Bio and Mech anyway. Terran too. (Before we added Immortal/Marauder) The only ways I see, and this has been discussed and tried a lot earlier, is to completely rebalance all core units, or just add the Marauder after all... For over a year of Starbow, we have seen the BW scenario: Bio units are inferior to mech in every possible way in TvT and TvP. Just as in BW...How can we expect it to work when we just copy the BW stats? After 10 years of progames, Bio units are still useless in all match-ups in BW, except TvZ. I think that is horrible to copy+paste into Starbow. On the other hand, it is horrible to copy+paste SC2 Bio into Starbow too. But with the addition of an extra bio unit, it might be easier to balance and create good game dynamics, compared to if we only have the Marine. + Show Spoiler + - How can we balance the Stalkers fun and super good mobility, while at the same time let them be the strong ranged Protoss core unit? For a long time in Starbow, they have been just as strong as Dragoons, but with Blink + Warp in. Imagine that in BW... We have tried a lot of different stats on Stalkers for over a year. But they have always caused balance and gameplay problems. It is an impossible equation: superior mobility and superior firepower Vs everything. And I do think Blink and Warp in are fun/interesting abilities that should be kept. When we made the Stalker too weak, Protoss had no core ground unit that could stand a fight, and it led to lame gameplay. When Stalkers were too strong, we saw bad and boring gameplay, balance problems, rage quit and frustration. It has never felt good enough, in my opinion. How long shall we continue to search for the golden balance? When is it time to approach a different solution? I see no other realistic solution other than to bring in the Immortal. This allows us to let the Stalker be a Stalker. I would appreciate if you all could come with ideas/suggestions/solutions to how we can "solve" the problems described above. Or convince me why they are not problems. If we stick with Marauder/Immortal, how can we modify them so they are great for the game? If you want them gone, how can we modify the game so they are not needed? Just some thoughts before I am off to bed ^^ | ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
For defence against tougher air units. Immortals can't shoot up.  You can get air units such as scouts in defence, sure, but it's nicer if there is a decent ground to air option as well. I would rather things like Guardians are quite weak to stalkers, so that there's more reason to EDIT: I prefer the dynamic of dragoons/stalkers not being good against marines in head-on fights but being able to use the greater range and faster speed (when the bio units haven't used or don't have Stim Packs) to pick off marines. The marines can effectively become very good against them, but they need to maintain numbers and use stim in decent timing because they have less range, less speed without the stim effect and a small number of hit points. So long as stalkers are not too good against marines, you don't need marauders for them. We don't have roaches (and shouldn't) so there's less reason for the marauders against zerg. Ultralisks were always meant to be mostly good against marines, though matrix, good spreading and support from mines/tanks/irradiate/BCs are there to help out, snipe WAS there too what one stage, which was a nice option as long as it was not too strong (as it had great range and ultras are clunky and awkward when moving, as well as needing to reach the target to hit). As for making sure marines aren't too bad in general, one would usually use them with medics and matrix is excellent, isn't it? The medics have 6(!) healing range instead of the 2 they had in BW. Medics are still only 75/25, so can't you afford plenty for being body shield + healing + casting matrix? Oh, please clarify for me: stim packs do not increase the healing rate of medics, right? They only improve speed (at the cost of life) for medics, yes? HAHA! On the wiki: Archon Attributes: Armored, Psionic, Massive Cost: 175/275 That is a mistake, right? 100/300, shouldn't it be? Or have you seriously made it so that archons have only 1.5 range AND can ONLY be made from one DT (125/125) and one HT (50/150)? If it's just the average, it would be more realistic to have "100/300 or 250/250" because people most often morph two of the same anyway. | ||
|
GamanNo
Sweden63 Posts
On July 13 2013 10:39 Fuchsteufelswild wrote: HAHA! On the wiki: Archon Attributes: Armored, Psionic, Massive Cost: 175/275 That is a mistake, right? 100/300, shouldn't it be? Or have you seriously made it so that archons have only 1.5 range AND can ONLY be made from one DT (125/125) and one HT (50/150)? If it's just the average, it would be more realistic to have "100/300 or 250/250" because people most often morph two of the same anyway. Haha good catch. Fixed it. No idea how that happened O_o | ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
On the DT page: "Sacrifices 2 Templar to create an Archon . " - Eliminate the space :D On the HT page: "Sacrifices 2 Templar to create an Archon" - Archon is not a link here. I wish we used the two SC2 DT models though, I'm way more keen on them than Zeratul. | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
I am still unsure about marauder, but I'll watch some more games. Do not remove it yet imo. We still have much to learn. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9390 Posts
On July 13 2013 15:43 Xiphias wrote: I really want to watch the games dec csated before posting, but I have not time atm. Just want to say that I think the Stalker / Immortal is better than pure stalker in terms of design and gameplay. Maybe the values are not 100% perfect yet, but I think my ZvP Vs HideR shows a much more dynamic ZvP because of this. I am still unsure about marauder, but I'll watch some more games. Do not remove it yet imo. We still have much to learn. I think the combo of the maurauder and the immortal creates/rewards the same type of dynamic gameplay as in our ZvP. The maurauder is actually not there to make bio more cost effective vs protoss gateway. Actually quite the opposite, as a zealot, gateway, stalker army with the immortal target firing maurauders should beat an a-moving bio force. However, as the protoss player is rewarded for reducing his stalker count (as they aren't cost effective vs maurauders), he will be more vulnerable to drop play. Thus, the protoss player has in this proces traded mobility for cost efficiency. Just like what happened in our game where I needed to get immortals to counter lurkers which made me vulnerable to drop play. (EDIT: i Just thought of all these mindgame tricks you can do: Say you are a zerg player that see's an observer hanging over your hydras. You morph all of them into lurkers --> Force the protoss to mass immortals --> Then you kill the observer --> Cancel the morphing lurkers and drop hydras into my main with half the army and attack the 3rd with the other half). If the maurauder wasn't introduced, then it would have been pretty difficult to make bio vs protoss balanced while maintaing balance in the matchups. Compared to Sc2, the immortal is supposed to be; 1) Better vs bio (partly because its more massable) 2) Worse vs siege tanks. Compared to Sc2, the maurauder is supposed to be; 1) Worse vs gateway 2) Slightly weaker vs AOE, but AOE from toss should come later in the game, as protoss gateway units should be strong enough in them selves to not be too reliant on reavers/HT in the early midgame. 3) Have a higher mobility advantage over the protoss player as the Starbow economy forces protoss players to take bases on fewer units than they normally would in Sc2. To anyone who dislikes the maurauder and the immortal, could you tell me whether you disagree with the above desired "goals"? Admittely, we are not there yet, and the stats needs to be tweaked. Currently I see two neccesary changes; - Immortals aren't strong enough atm. Protoss gateway with immortal target firing loses to bio force. Vs hydra/lurker they still get raped. Either a straight up damage buff is needed, or a combo of 6 range and slightly higher damage is needed (my prefered). I would also consider to buff stalkers damage vs normal to 15 (but 14 vs light). In my opinion hydra/lurker should only be marginal cost effective vs a protoss player which orders his immortals to target fire lurkers. Otherwise, we will continue to see protoss players turtling for reavers on 2 bases, which kinda stales the game. - If we want bio players to be rewarded for teching to dropships in the early midgame, then bio production needs to be faster. For instance when a protoss player doesn't rush for reavers, he can have a lot more stuff in the earlymidgame, than a bio player (which is/should be forced to have dropships out). When you have twice the stuff of your opponent (and trades well in a battle) dealing with drops becomes too easy. Thus, I like too see lower bio build times (in return for lower cost efficiency). In TvZ bio is also somewhat weak, especially after the SV nerf and it seems that heavy vulture production is required along with bio (not that this is a bad thing though - but the point is that a bio BT buff likely won't have uninteded consequences). | ||
|
Fen1kz
Russian Federation216 Posts
On July 13 2013 08:40 Kabel wrote: - How can we balance Marines/Bio so they ARE NOT TOTALLY WORTHLESS in TvT and TvP, while at the same time NOT be too strong vs Zerg? How can we make a Marine actually be worth to build vs Terran, when a Vulture for 25 more minerals, just kills them in 3-shots and have superior advantages? Why would someone get them vs Protoss when they are so easily slaughtered and cost inefficent, compared to pure mech? i know u prolly tired of these my suggestions, but i'll do last try: Ghosts. Lockdown: Since zerg doesnt have mech units - ghost could have lockdown which could help bothin TvT and TvP only, doesnt affecting zerg at all. TvT: catch anything mechanical, like vultures, engage tanks, lock mech at 2 bases, etc TvP: catch blink stalkers, catch arbiters, reavers, prisms, anything I see lockdown stats as: 75 energy, no cooldown, 1 unit target, 0.25-0.50 bullet time, 9-11 range. maybe something like 10 ground range, 7 air range. and upgrade 100-100-60 in ghost academy to reduce energy cost of lockdown to 25, so it would be spammable lategame This also makes bio more mobile than mech T and P, not by adding mobility to bio, but reducing mobility of MT and P if you play bio (since bio is less mobile than mech T and P with his blink) remember: all lockdown stuff buff bio only in TvT and TvP, so lockdown would NOT be too strong vs Zerg Nuke: TvP: could harras protoss expand even if it have 10 cannons and guarded with DTs and arbiters TvT: could push tank lines back / harras PFs i dont know nuke stats, but you need make it cost a bit less than sc2, or the same. Again about tank lines: Nuke the only thing that makes tank fear. With proper range and cost, you cannot kill tank likes, but can push them back or weaken. Which will help dealing with turtling tank line in the middle of the map with turrets and mines. you cant kill it, but u can push it back? and then again and again. Nuke is forcing opponent to do something, which serves good both for gameplay and caster enjoyment. Another Spell - there's only your imagination and you can put any spell to that gap or leave ghost only with nuke/lock so its gamedesign potential if you find something in bio should be fixed Comparation of my/sc2 ghost & sc2 maradeur with marine: Ghost: high hp, high cost, high dmg, less mobility, more range, ability of locking someone for marines attack Maradeur: high hp, high cost, high dmg, same mobility, more range, ability of slowing someone for marines attack proof that ghost could fill maradeur hole in bio Current status: maradeur has not been implemented, ghost is unused and not core unit in any MA at all. --- the end of ghost manifest --- --- conclusion: why does SB not need maradeur: 1) because maradeur is higher HP marine. That's all. 2) because there's 3 units that could be rebalanced and implemented to help mid/lategame bio -> reaper, firebat, ghost ofc higher HP marine is good choice by simplicity, but doesn't it feels poor to you by design? Here we have: fast jumper, melee splash attacker and battlecaster, all of them have no equal units in Z army or P army, which is good because of diversity. --- some my ideas about bio and things what i want you to check - lategame upgrade to marine (in techlab, but armory req f.e.) (anything, from lowering cost to increasing HP or... anything) - 1 more spell to medic, maybe with upgrade - ANOTHER :D reaper lategame rebalance - dropship normal speed increase (the always were slowpokies for me) i bet bio could be powerful in all MAs and in all stages and wish you could fix it  | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9390 Posts
I prefer the dynamic of dragoons/stalkers not being good against marines in head-on fights but being able to use the greater range and faster speed (when the bio units haven't used or don't have Stim Packs) to pick off marines. The marines can effectively become very good against them, but they need to maintain numbers and use stim in decent timing because they have less range, less speed without the stim effect and a small number of hit points. In theory that does sound interesting, however what actually happened was that the protoss player could "turtle" outside the terran players base and kite him constantly with stalkers which made attacking as bio/moving out on the map a bad strategy. You could make two arguments here; 1) Bio players should learn to adopt, refine drop-based builds (solid's POV). 2) We could change stats of stalker/zealot/marine/speedling. I briefly covered Solid's argument in my long post, but basically I disagree with that POV as I believe the game needs to be fun and intutivie for everyone. The first time you play Starbow you should like it, the 50th time it should be fun as well and the 1000th time it should also be awesome. I don't like the concept that you can only play bio if you have a very specific build. Further, chances are that any type of drop based build without "natural map control" by the terran player would proove to be a gimmick in the long run. Generally, if you don't have a mobile army out on the map that can be a threat, then the defensive player can easily hold of the drop based play once he figures it out, and the terran player will get behind due to teching instead of getting faster econ. Thus I am a firm beliver in giving bio "natural map control", and stalkers kiting marines forever prevents that. Regarding changing stats, while this may say counterintuitive, that would likely be a lot more complicated than just adding immortal and maurauder. If we change the stalkers damage vs light, then we would have to change how zealots, lings worked, and then that may have various uninteded consequences, and in the end - even if optimize every single stat out there - it may not reward the desired gameplay. Actually I am convinced that it wouldn't reward a diversity of builds, because you would balance the game through the concept that the protoss player had to have x amount of stalkers outside the terran players base, so he could drain all energy of medis before marines came into protoss base, and then the battle would be somewhat even. But if protoss opted for a build order variety, he would have less than X stalkers, and likely just loose. And further, that wouldn't reward dropplay, since bio in a straight up fight would be significantly stronger than the protoss gateway force. Chances are that this would just further incentive fast reaver tech, which would proove counterproductive in terms of creating interesting gameplay. Could we take that into account by balancing other tech options accordingly? Maybe, but you get the point right? This gets quite complicated and we simply doesn't have the ressources to get every stat out there completely right. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 13 2013 18:44 Fen1kz wrote: i know u prolly tired of these my suggestions, but i'll do last try: Ghosts. Lockdown: Since zerg doesnt have mech units - ghost could have lockdown which could help bothin TvT and TvP only, doesnt affecting zerg at all. TvT: catch anything mechanical, like vultures, engage tanks, lock mech at 2 bases, etc TvP: catch blink stalkers, catch arbiters, reavers, prisms, anything I see lockdown stats as: 75 energy, no cooldown, 1 unit target, 0.25-0.50 bullet time, 9-11 range. maybe something like 10 ground range, 7 air range. and upgrade 100-100-60 in ghost academy to reduce energy cost of lockdown to 25, so it would be spammable lategame This also makes bio more mobile than mech T and P, not by adding mobility to bio, but reducing mobility of MT and P if you play bio (since bio is less mobile than mech T and P with his blink) remember: all lockdown stuff buff bio only in TvT and TvP, so lockdown would NOT be too strong vs Zerg Nuke: TvP: could harras protoss expand even if it have 10 cannons and guarded with DTs and arbiters TvT: could push tank lines back / harras PFs i dont know nuke stats, but you need make it cost a bit less than sc2, or the same. Again about tank lines: Nuke the only thing that makes tank fear. With proper range and cost, you cannot kill tank likes, but can push them back or weaken. Which will help dealing with turtling tank line in the middle of the map with turrets and mines. you cant kill it, but u can push it back? and then again and again. Nuke is forcing opponent to do something, which serves good both for gameplay and caster enjoyment. Another Spell - there's only your imagination and you can put any spell to that gap or leave ghost only with nuke/lock so its gamedesign potential if you find something in bio should be fixed Comparation of my/sc2 ghost & sc2 maradeur with marine: Ghost: high hp, high cost, high dmg, less mobility, more range, ability of locking someone for marines attack Maradeur: high hp, high cost, high dmg, same mobility, more range, ability of slowing someone for marines attack proof that ghost could fill maradeur hole in bio Current status: maradeur has not been implemented, ghost is unused and not core unit in any MA at all. --- the end of ghost manifest --- --- conclusion: why does SB not need maradeur: 1) because maradeur is higher HP marine. That's all. 2) because there's 3 units that could be rebalanced and implemented to help mid/lategame bio -> reaper, firebat, ghost ofc higher HP marine is good choice by simplicity, but doesn't it feels poor to you by design? Here we have: fast jumper, melee splash attacker and battlecaster, all of them have no equal units in Z army or P army, which is good because of diversity. --- some my ideas about bio and things what i want you to check - lategame upgrade to marine (in techlab, but armory req f.e.) (anything, from lowering cost to increasing HP or... anything) - 1 more spell to medic, maybe with upgrade - ANOTHER :D reaper lategame rebalance - dropship normal speed increase (the always were slowpokies for me) i bet bio could be powerful in all MAs and in all stages and wish you could fix it I agree, that might be a possible way to fix this kind of stuff for bio. However, the marauder is the more simple solution. Yet with the marauder in, the reaper and the ghost both need a second look. Why? The reaper right now was meant to be an antilight army unit. Is a third bio army unit still needed/justified? The ghost was meant to be an antiposition/antibig unit support caster. Most of that is now done through the marauder. If the game was to find the sought balance of MMM being able to combat spread out mech play without the ghost this could be a problem. Add the ghost with the ability to unsiege everything (through nuke or cloak+shock) and bio may just run over mech (or everything that's not an "infantry" unit). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9390 Posts
On July 13 2013 18:44 Fen1kz wrote: i know u prolly tired of these my suggestions, but i'll do last try: Ghosts. Lockdown: Since zerg doesnt have mech units - ghost could have lockdown which could help bothin TvT and TvP only, doesnt affecting zerg at all. TvT: catch anything mechanical, like vultures, engage tanks, lock mech at 2 bases, etc TvP: catch blink stalkers, catch arbiters, reavers, prisms, anything I see lockdown stats as: 75 energy, no cooldown, 1 unit target, 0.25-0.50 bullet time, 9-11 range. maybe something like 10 ground range, 7 air range. and upgrade 100-100-60 in ghost academy to reduce energy cost of lockdown to 25, so it would be spammable lategame This also makes bio more mobile than mech T and P, not by adding mobility to bio, but reducing mobility of MT and P if you play bio (since bio is less mobile than mech T and P with his blink) remember: all lockdown stuff buff bio only in TvT and TvP, so lockdown would NOT be too strong vs Zerg Nuke: TvP: could harras protoss expand even if it have 10 cannons and guarded with DTs and arbiters TvT: could push tank lines back / harras PFs i dont know nuke stats, but you need make it cost a bit less than sc2, or the same. Again about tank lines: Nuke the only thing that makes tank fear. With proper range and cost, you cannot kill tank likes, but can push them back or weaken. Which will help dealing with turtling tank line in the middle of the map with turrets and mines. you cant kill it, but u can push it back? and then again and again. Nuke is forcing opponent to do something, which serves good both for gameplay and caster enjoyment. Another Spell - there's only your imagination and you can put any spell to that gap or leave ghost only with nuke/lock so its gamedesign potential if you find something in bio should be fixed Comparation of my/sc2 ghost & sc2 maradeur with marine: Ghost: high hp, high cost, high dmg, less mobility, more range, ability of locking someone for marines attack Maradeur: high hp, high cost, high dmg, same mobility, more range, ability of slowing someone for marines attack proof that ghost could fill maradeur hole in bio Current status: maradeur has not been implemented, ghost is unused and not core unit in any MA at all. --- the end of ghost manifest --- --- conclusion: why does SB not need maradeur: 1) because maradeur is higher HP marine. That's all. 2) because there's 3 units that could be rebalanced and implemented to help mid/lategame bio -> reaper, firebat, ghost ofc higher HP marine is good choice by simplicity, but doesn't it feels poor to you by design? Here we have: fast jumper, melee splash attacker and battlecaster, all of them have no equal units in Z army or P army, which is good because of diversity. --- some my ideas about bio and things what i want you to check - lategame upgrade to marine (in techlab, but armory req f.e.) (anything, from lowering cost to increasing HP or... anything) - 1 more spell to medic, maybe with upgrade - ANOTHER :D reaper lategame rebalance - dropship normal speed increase (the always were slowpokies for me) i bet bio could be powerful in all MAs and in all stages and wish you could fix it It's very possible your suggestions for the ghosts are very good. However, your post mostly adresses later game issues, which really has little to do with the introduction of the maurauder. Ghosts likely cannot be a unit that can give early game map control to bio, and reward drop play rather than "take your whole army and attack the protoss player". | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Your suggestion for the Ghost sounds good and it could work. If the current Ghost in Starbow still sucks, then maybe your suggestion can be something worth to try. (I just want to see more Ghosts used first before I change them further.) But I do not think that is enough to help improve Bio in the early/mid game. I might be wrong ofc. Do we really want to see mass Ghosts as a common unit composition? Do we want to see Ghosts as a core unit early in the game? Atm, Nukes are cheaper and have shorter calldown time compared to SC2. But they also affect a smaller radius. This means that it is easier to hit with a Nuke, because there is less time for the opponent to react. But the Nuke is not as devestating. In other words, the Nuke requires a low investment, low risk and with medium gain if it hits. The old Nuke has a high investment, high risk and high gain if it hits. Most players do not want to gamble like this? I also agree on your other comments on bio, for example Reaper might need some more mid/late game utilty. (I would still like to know if the splash upgrade is useful at all, or just completely useless.) | ||
|
Fen1kz
Russian Federation216 Posts
- sc2 ghost itself have decent attack, so its possible to mass ghosts lategame and deal dmg compared to marines dmg - nuke should be able to push tanks back, thats the core point of bio playing against tank lines with decent damage and locking i see that ghosts could take mapcontrol from stalkers / vultures also remember that ghosts have cloak, making them kinda like soft-DTs, who're insanely good @mapcontrolling | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
Pure bio should not be viable. Ever. It's just Tier 1.5 units coming out of Terrans first production structure. There shouldn't BE such a thing as a "bio" player. Bio openers, yes. Biomech compositions, yes. But saying Terran needs Marauders for "bio" to be viable is missing the point that "bio" as a standalone composition is not a thing that should even exist in the first place. Stalkers kiting your Marines all day? Wouldn't it be great if there was a unit that moved at the same speed as Marines, had 6+ range, and bonus damage versus armored at the cost of not being able to shoot air units? We already have that. It's called the Siege Tank. Need fast, mobile units to take map control? We have that. It's called Vultures with Spider Mines. Interested in drop play to split the Protoss players attention and force multitasking? Awesome. Drop Ghosts with Nukes, backstab with Reapers, drop Tanks on cliffs, or just use good old classic Marines and Medics. This concept of sticking with bio somehow making you more mobile and drop-play based is a complete fallacy, and the introduction of the Marauder doesn't add anything new, it just gives a lazy watered-down alternative to one of Terran's flagship iconic units so that players don't have to bother macroing out of more than one type of production facility. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
- Fix Null Ward so it is not bugged. (I will try at least T_T) - Increase energy cost from 25 to 50, since they seem very spammable atm. - Decrease Sentinel damage from 8 to 6, because they right now beat a Hydra 1v1. - Remove the Ultralisk Charge ability since it is so bugged and strange. (It looks quite funny though ^^) - Increase Ultralisk damage from 20 to 25 or 30. (Still no splash damage. Lurkers and Banelings are enough splash for Z?) - Decrease Viking speed movement a little bit. (It is very easy to catch enemy Warp Prism/Dropships atm, which just shuts down harassment possibilities vs T.) - Increase the amount of units Rift can teleport to the Nexus. Right now it is only 3 units. I consider to increase it to 5. (This would encourage Protoss to move units in smaller groups for harassment/skirmishes, since there is a "safe" way of saving them. The downside might be that for example Vulture or Banshee harassment is very easy to prevent, since P can just use Rift to get his Stalkers there immediately. To balance this, I consider to increase the "teleport" time from 5 to 7 seconds. So when Rift is used, the units will be teleported to the Nexus and be "stunned" for 7 seconds. THEN they can start to move.) - Rework Turret + Show Spoiler + Hider has been writing a lot about this here in the thread. I have been a bit doubtful. But I do think he has some good points. First of all, I will NOT nerf Turrets. I consider to just rearrange what they are good against. My suggestion: Turret damage reduced from 12x2 to 8x2. Instead of single target damage, it deals 50% splash damage to air units within radius 1. (Half the radius of an exploding Scarab with splash upgrade.) This means that Turrets are better vs large groups of air units and vs air deathballs. Instead they will be weaker vs low number of air units. Just as the Starbow Planetary Fortress works vs ground units, which IMO was a very good addition to the gameplay. Turrets will NOT be as cost efficent vs small harassment. (Single Dropship, 4-6 splitted Mutalisks, one Banshee etc.) Instead they will be much better vs large harassment, like 15-20 Mutalisks, tightly packed doom Drops, mass Carriers etc. It is ofc still possible to build Turrets to prevent drops. But the more cost efficent and more challenging way is to rely on Vikings and other mobile units. That however requires more multitasking skills. So if players want to use static defence, that is possible. Just not as efficent as controlling units for defence. If properly balanced, I think this change will lead to more entertaining gameplay. Does this sound resonable? Would this have unintended consequenses for the gameplay? Immortal/Marauder/Zerg + Show Spoiler + When I test in the editor, Gateway units feel very weak vs Marine/Marauder/Medic. Hydras also seem to beat pure Gateway units very easily. One possible small change can be to increase the damage of Immortals by +5 or +3. Maybe 20 vs light, 25 vs normal, 30 vs armored. (Instead of 15 vs light, 20 vs normal, 25 vs armored.) This would make them kill Hydras and Marauders in one less shot. (Still kill Marines in 3-shots, and that is good IMO, since Marines should be good vs them.) Any other ideas? How does it look ingame? Anyone has done some calculations or testing? How do you all feel about the Gateway/Warp gate dynamic? - Gateway produces Zealot, Stalker, Immortal, HT, DT - Warp gate produces Zealot, Stalker, DT The "raw" power comes from the Gateway. Should we do as Jay suggested, add the Talisman upgrade to HT so they gain +25 energy from start? Or shall we just scrap this idea for Warpgate/Gateway completely? Other stuff you think is important to look at atm? | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
For the very last time: Pure bio should not be viable. Ever. It's just Tier 1.5 units coming out of Terrans first production structure. There shouldn't BE such a thing as a "bio" player. Bio openers, yes. Biomech compositions, yes. But saying Terran needs Marauders for "bio" to be viable is missing the point that "bio" as a standalone composition is not a thing that should even exist in the first place. But no one wants pure bio to be viable... No one wants pure bio to be able to break siege lines, lurker contains or heavily defended areas... I have already stated this so many times. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
On July 14 2013 00:46 Kabel wrote: @SmileZerg But no one wants pure bio to be viable... No one wants pure bio to be able to break siege lines, lurker contains or heavily defended areas... I have already stated this so many times. Then I'm not sure what the Marauder is doing in the game, because it doesn't fulfill any role that either Siege Tanks or the Matrix spell don't already take care of. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  34222Sea  3246Bisu 1117Larva  914Mini 363ggaemo 347Hyun 177Soma 175Mong 159ZerO 143[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games singsing1875 B2W.Neo1366 Lowko621 FrodaN389 DeMusliM388 crisheroes382 Mlord300 Happy283 Beastyqt222 QueenE169 Fuzer  160ArmadaUGS141 KnowMe58 ZerO(Twitch)16 Codebar5 |
|
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Online Event
BSL Team Wars
Team Hawk vs Team Sziky
Online Event
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
