EPTThat's pretty cool actually, when it first came on Meta they were sort of a bit dismissive of what a third-party Mod could be like
Starbow - Page 177
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23122 Posts
That's pretty cool actually, when it first came on Meta they were sort of a bit dismissive of what a third-party Mod could be like | ||
|
murphs
Ireland417 Posts
He keeps saying it's really fun. He said he loves using tanks and vultures again. "It's like brood war without the ridiculously high entry barrier" | ||
|
Daumen
Germany1073 Posts
On February 13 2014 11:28 Fishgle wrote: thanks! Yea, creep gives regen to enemy zerg (creep isn't owned by players, only creep tumors are). It also boosts tunneling move speed! As for Overcharge, that'll probably be worded in a way that primarily explains what Overcharge is, and then maybe clarifies its unequal benefit. I was just giving out ideas, ill leave the wording to you guys ;D im not even an english native speaker. But generally those things that you dont notice instantly or things that you expect from BW but arent like brood war could be mentioned. Maybe not necessarily something like "Lurkers are Armored now and have 140 hp" but maybe something like "Medics have the Matrix abillity, it gives a friendly biological unit 100 Shield, a Mechanical unit gets 150 Shield." <- poorly worded, not content with that, but that Info is A. Something that BW players would find nice to know, since they expect the Matrix on the SV, and it also declares that Matrix is stronger on Mech units, usually ppl dont notice that unless they read the tooltip carefully. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23122 Posts
| ||
|
Jermman
Canada174 Posts
On February 13 2014 11:50 Wombat_NI wrote: Also, I'd stick something in like advertising the Chat channel/Group, now it might just me that's incompetent at knowing the Bnet interface but if it wasn't for TL I wouldn't have known that those were the places to find matches etc. this this this this. Ive been redirecting people from the group to the chat channel for a few days. You need a tooltip that implies the chat channel is the right place to go for opponents. | ||
|
Daumen
Germany1073 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On February 12 2014 19:43 Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: Fun fact - we tried the Colossus back from late 2013 until about a week before the hype train rolled. It didn't work, no matter how much we changed it. Either it would be useless due to how easy it was to snipe, or it completely dominated the battlefield. You have to remember that the Colossus' main weakness is purely strategic. The is no interesting micro or tactics involved in "Snipe with anti air units". There are a lot of interesting composition dynamics, but that is not the goal of StarBow - and it leads to binary outcomes. Contrast this with highly tactical weaknesses of most BW and StarBow units like: Low range, Friendly fire, Overkill, Immobile while attacking, Minimum range or simply a low base stat (HP, dmg, Speed, attspd ect.). All of these makes battles dynamic because the way to counter them is with positioning and micro rather than pure composition. "But what if you remove the weakness to anti air?" you ask... Then it won't be a Colossus anymore. People expect a certain behaviour from a unit that looks like, and is called a Colossus - and we have indeed toyed with the thought of making a completely new Robo unit with inspirations from the Colossus, but still so fundamentally different that it needed a new model and name. Then the hype train left, and all discussions about this unit was put on hold. Your post makes it sound like the Colossus being air-attackable was the only real, major weakness that was considered for the unit. If I'm misinterpreting your words, then I apologize in advance, I'm not very familiar with SB's development history. In case I read correctly... The Colossus needs to be modeled after other powerful ground units, like the Tank and Reaver. The Tank doesn't have just one major weakness, it has MANY. A sieged tank can't move PERIOD, it has friendly fire, and it has a minimum attack range. All three of those are very considerable drawbacks. The Reaver is almost immobile without another unit there to move it around, has an unpredictable attack, and has a price tag attached to every shot. These might not work for SB, but they would be the first things I'd try if I was looking at the unit. The key is making the Colossus lose 90% efficiency if it is A-moved, the same way Tanks and Reavers do, and gain a lot of efficiency when controlled by superior mechanical players. But how to do this? 1. The least invasive, most simple way is to just change its attack pattern. Instead of a horizontal line way out ahead of the Colossus, the unit should attack in a straight line from its feet toward its target. A Colossus used from the back of a deathball becomes almost useless. To really maximize its attack, it has to either be suicidal and come close to the enemy (wrong way to use it) or it has to FLANK the enemy army while your Zealots/Archons engage head on. Make it a bit more maneuverable than it already is, and the unit becomes extremely positional. 2. Another uninvasive option is to make the Colossus's attack work like Seeker Missile. Give it a charge up time and a red laser that designates its target. Add overkill. Multiple unmicroed Colossus are likely to waste attacks on the same clump of units, while even microed Colossi can be counter-microed by quickly moving the designated target around the battlefield. Then boost its attack power so that the hits it does land hit pretty hard. 3. Similar to option 1 but more invasive (so the unit can be made more powerful when used correctly) is to give it that vertical beam from its feet to the target, but also give it friendly fire. Make it attack less often, but hit harder, so that the Protoss is really rewarded for attacking when the targets are perfectly lined up... and punished severely for letting the Colossus attack through his own front line. Just like a SC2 TvZ Biomech army punishes Terran for letting the Zerg get to his Marines by having the Tanks/Mines hit the Marines. | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On February 13 2014 09:58 chocorush wrote: Poor mine placement can back fire as the dt drags mines into your own units. If you really want DT harrass to be more effective, I would just increase the damage on DT's so that they one shot SCV's like they do to drones, and not trigger the base attack message. (Does this even work in starbow? I'm getting SC2 this week so I can't test it now). That way Terran still needs to pay attention when they know DT's are out, rather than just scan and shut things down immediately. Edit - I take back my thoughts on mines vs. arbiter tech late game. It shouldn't be a factor as long as you have science vessels anywhere near your army, but it does cause a weird dynamic where zealots might not drag mines if terran doesn't have detection. On the other hand it would be cool if you had an arbitered army over a land mine and you hit "scan" and their entire army blows up :D. DT mine drags are overrated, only bad players siege close enough to mines for that to happen and defuse mines if they have to siege close/over them. Ok so Stork did against Idra but he always made careless mistakes, you never saw it in a real pro game, I don't even see them in amateur games. The benefits outweigh the cons IMO. The benefit is that Protoss can play a guerilla style tempo game which is always fun to watch, the con is no invisible mine drags (mine drags are still possible with zealots or exposing the DT). With the old way when Terran mines the map you just have the Protoss deathball roaming around defusing mines all day, probably my least favorite part of BW. | ||
|
Booom3
Sweden11 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On February 13 2014 12:42 pure.Wasted wrote: Your post makes it sound like the Colossus being air-attackable was the only real, major weakness that was considered for the unit. If I'm misinterpreting your words, then I apologize in advance, I'm not very familiar with SB's development history. In case I read correctly... The Colossus needs to be modeled after other powerful ground units, like the Tank and Reaver. The Tank doesn't have just one major weakness, it has MANY. A sieged tank can't move PERIOD, it has friendly fire, and it has a minimum attack range. All three of those are very considerable drawbacks. The Reaver is almost immobile without another unit there to move it around, has an unpredictable attack, and has a price tag attached to every shot. These might not work for SB, but they would be the first things I'd try if I was looking at the unit. The key is making the Colossus lose 90% efficiency if it is A-moved, the same way Tanks and Reavers do, and gain a lot of efficiency when controlled by superior mechanical players. But how to do this? 1. The least invasive, most simple way is to just change its attack pattern. Instead of a horizontal line way out ahead of the Colossus, the unit should attack in a straight line from its feet toward its target. A Colossus used from the back of a deathball becomes almost useless. To really maximize its attack, it has to either be suicidal and come close to the enemy (wrong way to use it) or it has to FLANK the enemy army while your Zealots/Archons engage head on. Make it a bit more maneuverable than it already is, and the unit becomes extremely positional. 2. Another uninvasive option is to make the Colossus's attack work like Seeker Missile. Give it a charge up time and a red laser that designates its target. Add overkill. Multiple unmicroed Colossus are likely to waste attacks on the same clump of units, while even microed Colossi can be counter-microed by quickly moving the designated target around the battlefield. Then boost its attack power so that the hits it does land hit pretty hard. 3. Similar to option 1 but more invasive (so the unit can be made more powerful when used correctly) is to give it that vertical beam from its feet to the target, but also give it friendly fire. Make it attack less often, but hit harder, so that the Protoss is really rewarded for attacking when the targets are perfectly lined up... and punished severely for letting the Colossus attack through his own front line. Just like a SC2 TvZ Biomech army punishes Terran for letting the Zerg get to his Marines by having the Tanks/Mines hit the Marines. The real question I think should be why? What does the Colossus do for Protoss? I know I'm repeating myself but I think unit design needs to be based on needs, not wants. The Colossus is just a nice to have, we have nice to haves in BW too, remember the Dark Archon? Mind-control is a really cool ability, so is feedback, in the end when was the last time we saw these abilities used? Infested Terrans? Again cool ability, nice to have, never seen in game except for BM. What will happen is that we will end up making another form of the scout, unless we buff it so much that it becomes too powerful. I mean the problem with this design approach is this is basically what is happening in Blizzard HQ at the moment. They design units without addressing a specific problem in the race, they just design it, because it seems... cool. They also just keep repeating their own mistakes for this reason. How many times have they tried to reinstate the "Hero Thor" only for it to get rejected again, and again. They are doing what you are doing, they really want this Hero Thor to be in the game, and coming up with lots and lots of ideas about how they can do it. They kept trying even when the answer was right in front of their face. Terran just didn't need it. Blizzard is trying to come up with an artificial need for a unit, and then trying to fill the need of which doesn't exist, just so they can have this "cool unit". This is the problem with the Colossus and a lot of SC2 units. By reinstating the Reaver, the Colossus is really no longer necessary. Yes you may see it within the protoss arsenal, but it will be much like that of SC2 Roach/Hydra, where the combination is only there to balance the dps/tankness of the army and doesn't actually contribute to gameplay. They may as well be the same unit. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On February 13 2014 13:01 Booom3 wrote: Even Artosis agrees. Banelings suck. They're an extremely boring, one dimensional unit. Please just remove them for now, they're not fun. Even Artosis agrees? Artosis thinks that Protoss is an awesome race in SC2. | ||
|
Daumen
Germany1073 Posts
I play my TvZs like Dirtybag now and those close Marine FB Medic fights are rly fun to play ... unless you macro at the wrnog time... | ||
|
GTPGlitch
5061 Posts
On February 13 2014 11:36 murphs wrote: He keeps saying it's really fun. He said he loves using tanks and vultures again. "It's like brood war without the ridiculously high entry barrier" This so much I mean, I haven't played Starbow so much recently due to the LRSL But it was awesome being able to play without 200+apm and knowledge of perfect timings, and MMA-level multitask. Getting the experience of swaggy tanks, vulture mines, etc. wihtout it either being a silly D- vs D- iccup game or getting smashed by a D-ranker. So yeah, thanks starbow people <3~ | ||
|
CutTheEnemy
Canada373 Posts
I beat my first masters player back in the day by rolling banes into his insanely big marine ball while he was defending my mutas in his main  100 supply, gone. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On February 13 2014 13:06 sluggaslamoo wrote: The real question I think should be why? What does the Colossus do for Protoss? I know I'm repeating myself but I think unit design needs to be based on needs, not wants. The Colossus is just a nice to have, we have nice to haves in BW too, remember the Dark Archon? Mind-control is a really cool ability, so is feedback, in the end when was the last time we saw these abilities used? Infested Terrans? Again cool ability, nice to have, never seen in game except for BM. What will happen is that we will end up making another form of the scout, unless we buff it so much that it becomes too powerful. I mean the problem with this design approach is this is basically what is happening in Blizzard HQ at the moment. They design units without addressing a specific problem in the race, they just design it, because it seems... cool. They also just keep repeating their own mistakes for this reason. How many times have they tried to reinstate the "Hero Thor" only for it to get rejected again, and again. They are doing what you are doing, they really want this Hero Thor to be in the game, and coming up with lots and lots of ideas about how they can do it. They kept trying even when the answer was right in front of their face. Terran just didn't need it. Blizzard is trying to come up with an artificial need for a unit, and then trying to fill the need of which doesn't exist, just so they can have this "cool unit". This is the problem with the Colossus and a lot of SC2 units. By reinstating the Reaver, the Colossus is really no longer necessary. Yes you may see it within the protoss arsenal, but it will be much like that of SC2 Roach/Hydra, where the combination is only there to balance the dps/tankness of the army and doesn't actually contribute to gameplay. They may as well be the same unit. How do you distinguish between necessary unit roles and unnecessary ones? What makes the Goliath necessary? If Terrans had no Goliath, they'd have made do with Marines. Sure, Tank/Goliath is a different playstyle from Tank/Marine, but that's not enough for you. The only thing Marines are really incapable of is dealing with Carriers and Guardians, and Wraiths could be used for that. If Colossus takes skill to use and opens up new compositions compared to the Reaver, then it is a good unit, period. The Hero Thor doesn't work not because Terrans couldn't possibly use another unit, it's because every single fucking thing Blizzard has tried with it has been extremely lame. I've been saying what would make the Thor interesting from day 1, give it less power, more HP, and a passive ability to intercept all enemy ranged attacks targeting friendly units behind it. Make it an actual tank that squads of Marines can run around on the battlefield. It would open up a cool Biomech playstyle in TvP, where the Thor acts like an immobile Siege Tank while Marines/Marauders fulfill the role of Vultures by being supremely mobile. New compositions are good for the game, because they reward different skillsets, open up different timings, and allow for greater diversity within the meta. Giving Protoss ground units they didn't have access to in BW would do a lot to shake up the way the race plays. Not that the Colossus is necessarily the unit to give them. | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On February 13 2014 13:07 pure.Wasted wrote: Even Artosis agrees? Artosis thinks that Protoss is an awesome race in SC2. and you disagree, and you think it makes your opinion more valuable | ||
|
InFaMOUs331
42 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23122 Posts
Also, if Protoss needs a new unit, Dark Archon is so much sexier anyway  | ||
|
SCST
Mexico1609 Posts
On February 13 2014 13:01 Booom3 wrote: Even Artosis agrees. Banelings suck. They're an extremely boring, one dimensional unit. Please just remove them for now, they're not fun. Artosis has lost like 12 games in a row against the same Zerg. This Zerg has used banelings only a couple times. Artosis doesn't even know what half the units in the game do still. He literally just said "what's that purple shit for on the hatcheries" . . . he literally just found out about Vikings. Also, he said "I hate splitting against Banelings". . . He doesn't like to split his marines, though he said he's willing to split for Lurkers (how does this make sense lol). Basically, he's pissed off and on a huge losing streak, so don't read to much into it. | ||
| ||
