|
United States7483 Posts
On December 18 2014 07:41 Glockateer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 07:33 Whitewing wrote: Blizzard is going about this expansion thing the wrong way. Rather than reducing the minerals in each patch, they should be reducing the amount of patches at each base, meaning saturation is fewer workers. This encourages more expanding to take advantage of the extra supply: suddenly you can make use of 4 or 5 bases simultaneously rather than just holding extra for when you run out in your other bases. The current form simply punishes players for not expanding, rather than rewarding them for doing so.
It also unnecessarily punishes players for falling behind. Come-backs become much harder when you can't build up for a while, try to take favorable engagements, and slowly expand. You run out of money before you can rebuild now, meaning one fight is more likely than ever to kill you. Reducing mineral patches will reduce income rates overall at the start of the game and will encourage more, but smaller, engagements and make deathballing harder and maxing out slower. The current system they are using will just make the game even more of a one and done. I agree with these points. Though, the gas would still need to be lowered or tweaked to fit with the less mineral patches. I remember a mod that went with one high-yield vespene geyser and less mineral patches. Not sure how it played out.
Agreed, a single high yield geyser per base would likely be fine. The main concern with that is rebalancing, which is likely why blizzard is avoiding doing it. Reducing income rates across the board would have interesting effects on balance, but there's no better time to try it.
Also: I want to point out: starting at 12 workers is a direct nerf to Protoss. Protoss typically has it's first chronoboost at 11 supply, which lets them get slightly ahead on workers. Now, they start at 12 with no chrono at the same time the opponent has 12, which is a nerf. In addition, Protoss is the most dependent on gas of all races, and the least dependent on minerals. This is a boost, relatively speaking, to the other races against Protoss.
|
On December 18 2014 09:38 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 09:17 Tresher wrote:On December 18 2014 09:06 Grumbels wrote:On December 18 2014 08:41 Tresher wrote:So we get a bunch of changes that we can´t test or see in action... Why? This just leads to useless theory crafting and balance whine BEFORE the game is even out. You can see them in action, there is the LotV alpha mod which allows you to test the changes personally. I'm sure they will try to update the mod to include these new changes. Im talking about the actual game. Not some badly designed fan mod that is done poorly by just watching the showmatches on Blizzcon 2014. Cyclone can´t even attack air there with their default weapon wtf. And Locusts that have almost the same Attack speed like stimmed Marines? At the Multiplayer Panel and the MP Update videos they said they wanted that Locusts have a stronger attack. Not faster. Actually, all of those things that are in that LotV alpha custom mode reflect the changes in actual LotV alpha, as designers of that mod are in touch with Blizzard, Locusts attack a lot faster, that is the only change made to them(yes, faster than stimmed Marines, you can even see that in one of those exhibition matches). Cyclones are bugged, and they are working on the fix. You are really talking out of your ass here. Pretty much every guy that played alpha at Blizzcon(together with Pros) said that this mod is really really well made, and you happen to be a smart-ass that shits on it. Except that I never said something about the bugged Cyclone. I said the ACTUAL standard weapon (not the lockon) doesn´t attack air units while in the preview videos it says it does. Learn to read. Also deal with it that not everybody likes what you do. Im sure Im not the only one that doesn´t like it. I don´t have to like it just because the masses do, Im not that kind of person that goes with the masses just because everyone does. No need to be rude like this.
|
On December 18 2014 09:58 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 09:43 H0i wrote: On more minor suggestions: I think they should merge observer speed and warp prism speed into one upgrade. Barely anyone ever gets these upgrades especially since prims start with higher speed by default. Then that would also maybe make room for an upgrade on robo that's actually interesting. I don't know if that's necessary. Theoretically if you have one (merged) upgrade you can replace it with two upgrades that have the same total cost and research time. However, there is probably some sort of minimum cost to an upgrade for it to have a reason to exist in the game (be justified as a separate upgrade), which provides justification for merging. But imo, if observer speed is so sporadically relevant it can not exist separately it should probably be removed from the game. There might be some specific use to it though.
No, make it cost 100/100. More is too much.
|
On December 18 2014 10:42 Tresher wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 09:38 Ramiz1989 wrote:On December 18 2014 09:17 Tresher wrote:On December 18 2014 09:06 Grumbels wrote:On December 18 2014 08:41 Tresher wrote:So we get a bunch of changes that we can´t test or see in action... Why? This just leads to useless theory crafting and balance whine BEFORE the game is even out. You can see them in action, there is the LotV alpha mod which allows you to test the changes personally. I'm sure they will try to update the mod to include these new changes. Im talking about the actual game. Not some badly designed fan mod that is done poorly by just watching the showmatches on Blizzcon 2014. Cyclone can´t even attack air there with their default weapon wtf. And Locusts that have almost the same Attack speed like stimmed Marines? At the Multiplayer Panel and the MP Update videos they said they wanted that Locusts have a stronger attack. Not faster. Actually, all of those things that are in that LotV alpha custom mode reflect the changes in actual LotV alpha, as designers of that mod are in touch with Blizzard, Locusts attack a lot faster, that is the only change made to them(yes, faster than stimmed Marines, you can even see that in one of those exhibition matches). Cyclones are bugged, and they are working on the fix. You are really talking out of your ass here. Pretty much every guy that played alpha at Blizzcon(together with Pros) said that this mod is really really well made, and you happen to be a smart-ass that shits on it. Except that I never said something about the bugged Cyclone. I said the ACTUAL standard weapon (not the lockon) doesn´t attack air units while in the preview videos it says it does. Learn to read. Also deal with it that not everybody likes what you do. Im sure Im not the only one that doesn´t like it. I don´t have to like it just because the masses do, Im not that kind of person that goes with the masses just because everyone does. No need to be rude like this. I am saying that it doesn't attack air because it is bugged, whole unit isn't working properly, I am not sure what you don't understand? Also, nobody is forcing you to like something, if you dislike something I am fine by that, but saying how mod is badly designed and done poorly is not about liking and opinion. It is about you being ignorant and spitting designers into face because of your assumptions.
|
"Terrazined Zealots"
Protoss already have builds that are able to harass a little bit in the early game. If Blizzard is looking to add more early game harassment mechanisms for Protoss because their data show that Protoss have difficulty expanding the most, and they are looking to even things up, then maybe they should look at things from a different angle.
My suggestion is to enable Protoss to defend expansions a little bit better. If Blizzard is thinking about a slow moving unit which can be invincible for x number of seconds, they can look to the Zealot for this. Blizzard can add a "Terrazine" ability for the Zealot which makes it impervious to attacks, and will allow it to deal with marine medivac drops. This spell can be cast by the Mothership Core, which will allow Protoss players to choose between activating Photon Overcharge, a static defense mechanism that only defends constructed Nexuses, or Terrazine, a slightly mobile defense mechanism that can also defend Nexuses that are still warping in.
It is still viable to use this mechanism for early harass due to the tanking ability of invincible zealots, but it will not be too overpowered due to the slow movement speeds of the Mothership Core + Zealot combo. It can also be used for late game zealot hit squads, but this would mean that the Mothership Core will be away from the main Protoss army, so there will be a risk-reward trade off that players can consider.
The ability may sound a bit similar to stimmed marines or frenzied zerglings from the HoTS campaign (though "Terrazined Zealots" only gain invincibility, no additional attack damage), but the need to build a unit to cast it, the need for energy to cast it, and the option of casting it over another spell should encourage players to develop more strategies and reward better in-game decision making.
I am a Terran player, and I hope that this suggestion is as objective as I wanted it to be.
P.S. I forgot to mention that this idea also brings the multiplayer side of Starcraft 2 closer to lore. Even if it is not implemented, it makes more sense compared to the idea of Hellions getting repaired by SCVs and Helbats getting healed by Medivacs.
|
Protoss Gateway unit idea, lorewise it is Nerazim
*insert Protoss name* *some Ninja skin with some Psi-Shuriken or similar* Cost 75/75/2 80HP/20Shield/0armor, light, biological Attack: Damage 15(+2), Cooldown: 1.5 Attack range 5, ground only speed: 3.0 (like a speed roach) size: like a zealot drop-size: 2
Auto-Cast ability, 6second cooldown: When attacking, the *Ninja Super Trooper* immidiately performs a second attack. tech requirement: twilight council
Stats Analysis: good damage output: 13.75 dps, good burst (due to the double attack at the beginning of a combat), good upgrading can't take many hits, so it has bad tanking for the Colossus mediocre range, so only zealots and archons can tank reasonably for it quite mobile, so it can roam the map a lot does not go well with usual deathball units like stalkers and Colossi due to standing in front of the stalkers
Strategically: The unit does synergize very well with zealots and can kill enemy workers and stray units very fast. The high-burst damage (30 on the first shot) makes it very good in the midnumbers against Terran bio units, because the bio-units can get bursted down before the medivac-heal takes full effect. From a cost-balance point of view, the unit cannot be massed on its own in early rushes, because of the high gas:mineral ratio. It's weakness are faster units such as zerglings or hellions that can close the distance and force it into combat, however, due to the high damage output they can still take a good amount of enemies with them into the grave. It should offer Protoss players an alternative ranged combat and harassment unit to the stalker, with a very contrasting approach in gameplay.
Tactically: The unit can be microed against very well due to the 5range and sniped very fast. However, with a reasonable zealot buffer the unit can dish out its high burst damage and then use its high speed to fall back until more zealots arrive. While it doesn't quite bring the same longterm damage output onto the battlefield as marines or hydralisks, the high burst damage allows it to quickly overwhelm enemy forces to fight another day.
|
On December 18 2014 04:04 DarkLordOlli wrote: Protoss needs an early/midgame unit that keeps us alive. Harassing isn't an issue when you can open blink, oracle, warp prism, phoenixes, etc. But what's a real issue is that protoss needs to be able to survive the bridge between gateway units and high tech AoE.
Building walls + forcefields + cannons + photon overcharge, what more could you want?
|
SC2 needs fundamental changes not bunch of cool stuff. I don't really understand them. Lotv is the last expansion, they could easily go balls deep. there is nothing really to lose if things go wrong.
|
On December 18 2014 12:22 saddaromma wrote: SC2 needs fundamental changes not bunch of cool stuff. I don't really understand them. Lotv is the last expansion, they could easily go balls deep. there is nothing really to lose if things go wrong.
They would lose the success of an already working game.
They would lose a lot of money if they essentially develop SC3 instead of an SC2 expansion.
For an expansion, the changes are spectacular already. Of course it is still SC2.
|
On December 18 2014 05:03 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:41 Lumi wrote:On December 18 2014 04:04 DarkLordOlli wrote: Protoss needs an early/midgame unit that keeps us alive. Harassing isn't an issue when you can open blink, oracle, warp prism, phoenixes, etc. But what's a real issue is that protoss needs to be able to survive the bridge between gateway units and high tech AoE. Since when is that /such/ a problem issue? This sounds like a TvP specific concern and frankly the boys aren't getting pulled as much .. which is the lone major exploit of that moment for Protoss, as far as I am aware. Open to your insights, though. - It's an issue because protoss is the race that has the most trouble securing extra expansions and splitting up their army to defend them. In LotV, economy changes will force protoss to do this though. Defending three bases is already an issue in HotS, of course depending on maps. Being forced to expand faster will automatically spread you more thin - which is fine for terran and zerg because their armies move very fast and work fine in smaller battles. Protoss armies are slow and rely a lot on unit/terrain synergy (zealot/sentry/colossus armies to defend the front -> stalkers to defend drops). Expanding faster = more places to defend = even more difficult to split your army correctly. This change alone would be a big nerf to protoss in HotS. - You also have to factor in the warpgate changes (8 second warpin time, 200% damage while warping in). Defensive emergency warpins won't exist anymore. Where you could previously warp in units to stall for time until your army or a part of it arrives, you won't be able to do that anymore. If you still warp in, those units will die incredibly fast and do nothing. It'd be like throwing resources at your opponent. This change alone would already be a gigantic problem in HotS. - The first two changes would already be hugely problematic for protoss as is, and we haven't even factored in the new units yet. Currently, terran gets HERCs and Cyclones (both are early-midgame units) and zerg gets Ravagers and Lurkers (which are midgame and late-midgame units respectively). For this early-midgame stage in the game, protoss gets... well, nothing. Immortals might be a bit stronger now against units that previously countered them (which is questionable, we'll have to test this), Disruptors are a tier 3 unit that costs insane amounts of gas and is only available at robotics bay tech, which means they most likely can't be in the game that early. Ravagers make forcefields irrelevant and Cyclones look like they counter every protoss unit (I'm quite sure that the unit will be massively worked on though, so don't think about it too much). So while the first two issues would already mess with protoss in its current state, LotV also introduces new units and abilities in the early-midgame for the other two races while protoss doesn't get any, has to expand faster and can't use defensive warpins anymore. What's really needed for protoss is a strong, beefy unit or concept that you can leave on its own, or with little support, and it will do fine. Something like a super-stalker. Of course you'd have to be incredibly careful not to turn that into an easy to mass, go across the map and kill people type of unit, but it's what protoss needs the most.
The quoted post is a lot of my worries in a nutshell. Protoss currently leans on its crazy-powerful AoE units, and its core Gateway army doesn't stack up against other cores like Roach/Hydra or Marine/Marauder/Medivac. Every Protoss player is ultimately forced into:
1) Get Colossi 2) Get Templar 3) 2base all-in such as Soultrain [hitting before other army gets to full strength] 4) Cheese.
Problem is that neither option 1 or option 2 splits up to defend multiple bases very well as Templar float along at an insultingly slow pace, and it's hard to really split up those big, expensive 6 supply Colossi. If you have enough Colossi to split them up in multiple places, you should have A-moved across the map a while ago. 2base all-ins are going to suffer with Legacy, and cheese is... cheese.
I couldn't be any LESS excited about the Disruptor as it looks like an all-or nothing, frustration factory. Either it connects and deals mad damage, instantly obliterating your enemy's army... or they avoid it/you miss and you get steamrolled easily. The idea of a unit that's invulnerable at any time for any reason already unnerves me... and now this secret squirrel 'other unit' can apparently do it too?
I'd rather see something beefier/shootier step into the Gateway & accept corresponding nerfs to Warpgate/Stalkers. The Stalker is a bit of a stumbling block for Protoss armies: it's great early game because its speed and regenerating Shields let it be a nuisance and make free pickoffs, and Blink lets groups of them be incredibly dangerous on their own, but once the biggest guns come out the Stalkers can't exploit either ability well. They must stay near their fire support because their DPS is lousy, and they can't make many blink maneuvers in big fights because (a) ain't nobody got time for that micro and (b) can't abandon the big guns to fight on their own.
I feel like this game is crying out for a Dragoon - it's beefier, has more stopping power against the 'Armored' (previously known as Medium/Large) units, and still had some early-game micro potential to shoot and scoot, but not as much as the Stalker with Blink.
|
On December 18 2014 04:44 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:04 DarkLordOlli wrote: Protoss needs an early/midgame unit that keeps us alive. Harassing isn't an issue when you can open blink, oracle, warp prism, phoenixes, etc. But what's a real issue is that protoss needs to be able to survive the bridge between gateway units and high tech AoE. So much this. We need smth similar to dragoon. Starbow has really cool solution: they moved stalkers to be more harass oriented unit and less multi purpose as they are currently in hots and added dragoons to fill the gap and allow protoss for more freedom to move on the map. That might need tweaking warp gate tech, but blizzard already stated they gonna at least change it a bit. I'd like to test postponing WG, so 1base WG rushes won't be a thing. Maybe add requirement for WG to have Twilight Council or even move WG to TC ?
these changes would make me want to play Toss In Lotv
|
On December 18 2014 12:17 SC2Towelie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:04 DarkLordOlli wrote: Protoss needs an early/midgame unit that keeps us alive. Harassing isn't an issue when you can open blink, oracle, warp prism, phoenixes, etc. But what's a real issue is that protoss needs to be able to survive the bridge between gateway units and high tech AoE. Building walls + forcefields + cannons + photon overcharge, what more could you want?
Other than the fact that walls work against protoss in PvT, I think the main problem is that protoss is forced to play passively and defensively when the opponent decides to choose an aggressive opening.
TvZ the zerg can try to get a map control by suddenly making a huge swell of lings, and technically terran can fight back the control if he doesn't lose all his hellions on the map and crank out a few more before he moves out again. Can be re-taken in 1-2 min.
PvZ it is already hard enough for protoss to get map control because of how slow its units are (and stalkers being expensive), it is generally not worth it to get map control. If the zerg suddenly gets like 20 lings and constantly patrolls around the map you can't even go out of your base until you have a sizeable army and a good defense back home ( so that the lings can't just run by). Well technically you can get vision if you go stargate, but zerg still gets the ground control which is more important imo.
PvT pure gateway (zealot stalker sentry) gets rekt by any decent bioball, especially with medivac support. Against bioball with medivac, even adding immortals, or having chargelots/blinkstalkers doesn't really help. Which is why protoss is forced to turtle until colossus/storm comes out, or kill the terran before they get medivac or large bioball. If the terran goes aggressive, the only way protoss can win is through landing good forcefield to split the terran army in half, which isn't going to happen easily on open areas, which is why protoss can only engage in chokes near their base in the early-mid game. (Or unless the protoss gets the perfect surround)
Because protoss early game is so shit (esp vs terran) they are forced to play passive until they get tier 3 units. They need to fix this, and to fix this they need to change warp gate as well.
|
On December 18 2014 13:01 KDot2 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:44 egrimm wrote:On December 18 2014 04:04 DarkLordOlli wrote: Protoss needs an early/midgame unit that keeps us alive. Harassing isn't an issue when you can open blink, oracle, warp prism, phoenixes, etc. But what's a real issue is that protoss needs to be able to survive the bridge between gateway units and high tech AoE. So much this. We need smth similar to dragoon. Starbow has really cool solution: they moved stalkers to be more harass oriented unit and less multi purpose as they are currently in hots and added dragoons to fill the gap and allow protoss for more freedom to move on the map. That might need tweaking warp gate tech, but blizzard already stated they gonna at least change it a bit. I'd like to test postponing WG, so 1base WG rushes won't be a thing. Maybe add requirement for WG to have Twilight Council or even move WG to TC ? these changes would make me want to play Toss In Lotv
Move warp gate to templar tech (still researched at cybernetics core though). Stalker change damage bonus from 12 +2 vs armored to 12 +2 vs light. Dragoon can be built at gateways, but requires robotic facility. Bam, now you get stalkers which are good at harrassment and decent in defending against harrassment too, and dragoons which aren't as expensive as immortals but still decent against marauders and roaches, and better against void rays. Also, no more retarded warp gate all-in in early-mid game. Then immortals can be changed to be the "tanking" unit instead of anti-seige-tank-ultralisk unit.
Also roll back the warp gate nerf that was added in LotV, I think pushing warp gate back to templar tech is good enough, and late game protoss would need quite a bit of help in defending against harrassment.
Or, since the warp gate is already pushed back we can make changes to the default gateway units (keep the warpgate nerf) to make them more powerful. Give zealots separate move speed upgrade and charge upgrade (move speed at twilight, charge at templar). Overall zealots would be faster than the current zealots we have, and late game zealots would be much more mobile, allowing for skirmishes to happen.
Protoss can now handle bioballs much easier in early-mid game with a force of zealot, dragoons, sentry, stalkers and maybe even immortals, and rely much less on forcefields. Since zerg already has ravagers to deal with forcefields, protoss might need that dragoon to support its gateway army which might get easily crushed by ling roach and ravagers.
Also, change colossus pls, but idk how we can do this.
|
This is all fine and dandy, but where are the updates for the most important thing in SC2? Where's the love for the destructible rocks???????
|
they need something else than photon overcharge. its a crappy ability that requires no micro and nothing is cool about it. make the photon micro-able. THANKS.
|
On December 18 2014 07:39 14681 wrote:Show nested quote + On December 18 2014 06:06 Zealously wrote:
What changes would you have made?
more broodwar
- Zerg need more AntiAir splash? Scourges. (Add some AoE splash, like flying banelings) Lots of awesome micro ability there - Protoss need a new unit? Reavers. Lots of awesome micro ability there. - Terran Cyclone has no idea what it's meant to be? Vultures. Lots of awesome micro ability there. Instead of coming up with new unit designs that don't work well or have very specific uses, don't be afraid of importing fully-fledged existing units that work really well, everyone loves, and have a lot of uses.
All these BW units you said may not work well in SC2 at all. The lurker which so many people wanted to bring back is struggling. What we need are units that function well in SC2. You could name them Reaver,Scourge or whatever. I don't care.
|
I don't like a thing about Lotv... Call me paranoid, but i think this all is entirely a wrong direction. Game already has shitloads of units and strategies that leads to randomness and unconsistency. But looks like blizzard is ok with that, as all they seem to care about is crowd reactions like "omg mine shoot all the probes/mutas/banes etc". All these new units (and Hots units like oracle and viper) remind me of some mediocre moba. BUT THIS IS RTS. Stop adding niche units with fancy micro mechanics!! They should remove units from the game, not add them. In Lotv each race will have like 15-16 playable units wtf?!! Is this Total Annihilation? Or starcraft?
|
On November 18 2014 22:22 ejozl wrote: What if the Mineral patch was divided into three depletion levels, lets say Bountiful, Fair, Scarce If a mineral patch is Bountiful, it means your worker returns 5 minerals pr. trip. If a mineral patch is Fair, it means your worker returns 4 minerals pr. trip. If a mineral patch is Scarce, it means your worker returns 3 minerals pr. trip. At 1500->1000 Minerals it's Bountiful, 1000->500 Minerals it's Fair, 500->0 Minerals it's Scarce. 100 trips to earn the first 500 Minerals. 125 trips to earn the second 500 Minerals. 167 trips to earn the last 500 Minerals.
It means there's still 1500 Minerals on a patch that you can earn from it. You still get fast into the midgame, unlike changing the amount of patches. But this way there's this incentive to take new bases that a lot of you talk about, instead of getting snowballed into defeat, if you can get no mining base for a while. I think this is a sweet compromise and actually fit the changing model for the Mineral Field when it gets to look more depleted the more you mine from it.
This is interesting idea. May be have the minerals change colors when they change yields.
What do the economy gurus here think about this?
|
well I hope the immortal upgrade isnt at the robo bay.....because if i have that up why not just build a colossus
|
On December 18 2014 10:36 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 07:41 Glockateer wrote:On December 18 2014 07:33 Whitewing wrote: Blizzard is going about this expansion thing the wrong way. Rather than reducing the minerals in each patch, they should be reducing the amount of patches at each base, meaning saturation is fewer workers. This encourages more expanding to take advantage of the extra supply: suddenly you can make use of 4 or 5 bases simultaneously rather than just holding extra for when you run out in your other bases. The current form simply punishes players for not expanding, rather than rewarding them for doing so.
It also unnecessarily punishes players for falling behind. Come-backs become much harder when you can't build up for a while, try to take favorable engagements, and slowly expand. You run out of money before you can rebuild now, meaning one fight is more likely than ever to kill you. Reducing mineral patches will reduce income rates overall at the start of the game and will encourage more, but smaller, engagements and make deathballing harder and maxing out slower. The current system they are using will just make the game even more of a one and done. I agree with these points. Though, the gas would still need to be lowered or tweaked to fit with the less mineral patches. I remember a mod that went with one high-yield vespene geyser and less mineral patches. Not sure how it played out. Agreed, a single high yield geyser per base would likely be fine. The main concern with that is rebalancing, which is likely why blizzard is avoiding doing it. Reducing income rates across the board would have interesting effects on balance, but there's no better time to try it. Also: I want to point out: starting at 12 workers is a direct nerf to Protoss. Protoss typically has it's first chronoboost at 11 supply, which lets them get slightly ahead on workers. Now, they start at 12 with no chrono at the same time the opponent has 12, which is a nerf. In addition, Protoss is the most dependent on gas of all races, and the least dependent on minerals. This is a boost, relatively speaking, to the other races against Protoss.
You could also argue it's a nerf to Zerg based on larvae typically putting Z at 12 workers before other races. Sounds like T benefits most.
On December 18 2014 15:04 AndAgain wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2014 22:22 ejozl wrote: What if the Mineral patch was divided into three depletion levels, lets say Bountiful, Fair, Scarce If a mineral patch is Bountiful, it means your worker returns 5 minerals pr. trip. If a mineral patch is Fair, it means your worker returns 4 minerals pr. trip. If a mineral patch is Scarce, it means your worker returns 3 minerals pr. trip. At 1500->1000 Minerals it's Bountiful, 1000->500 Minerals it's Fair, 500->0 Minerals it's Scarce. 100 trips to earn the first 500 Minerals. 125 trips to earn the second 500 Minerals. 167 trips to earn the last 500 Minerals.
It means there's still 1500 Minerals on a patch that you can earn from it. You still get fast into the midgame, unlike changing the amount of patches. But this way there's this incentive to take new bases that a lot of you talk about, instead of getting snowballed into defeat, if you can get no mining base for a while. I think this is a sweet compromise and actually fit the changing model for the Mineral Field when it gets to look more depleted the more you mine from it.
This is interesting idea. May be have the minerals change colors when they change yields. What do the economy gurus here think about this?
It's a copy / pasted solution from the other economic discussion thread, been discussed quite a bit. Wouldn't need any change in color as there's already visual cues for mineral patches at 0-499, 500-999, and 1,000-1,500 in the current state of the game.
|
|
|
|