On December 20 2014 02:06 The_Templar wrote: This honestly does concern me, but what if EMP disabled the disruptor's ability/reset the cooldown?
Well I'm thinking, instead of making it invulnerable, make it ignore the first 10 points of damage. That would make it strong versus MMM and other units it's intended to counter, but weak against mech. Widow mines would counter them pretty hard though...
On December 19 2014 21:25 SatedSC2 wrote: I don't think the Reaper needs to be more useful in the mid-to-late game.
I do.
Nothing should be added to the game solely for early game scouting. That's pretty much the only use it has now so ... yeah, it needs some utility.
They could just merge the reaper and the herc imo. Create an upgrade that gives the reaper a bunch of extra hp and a "rocket boost" that works the same way as the grappling hook and you'll create more utility for the reaper, both in combat and for harassing. The herc is basically just the hook mechanic anyway, giving it to another unit is fine.
Additional new Protoss unit We haven’t finalized design on a new Protoss unit, but it’s something we’re heavily focused on these days. We have general concepts and ideas we’re trying, but haven’t nailed down something solid yet. Generally speaking, we’re experimenting with allowing Protoss to play a more aggressive containment game in the early game by utilizing a new unit. We feel this will give some more variety to Protoss openings, since Protoss generally tends to play defensively. If you have good ideas or feedback in this area, it would be appreciated.
We’re currently exploring a very different type of harassing unit. We don’t yet have the specific details yet but these are the things we’re thinking right now:
Early game unit Slow movement speed (to differentiate from other early game harassers) Phase shift ability. Unit goes completely invulnerable for X seconds on a short cooldown (to be able to move in and harass and to get out in a different way compared to say like Blink harass) Doesn’t counter core units for cost (idea of having a core unit that goes invulnerable just sounds like it would be too much. Plus with this effective ability, this unit could still be a great harasser even if it’s not effective for cost). But like we said, we’re still in the concept/discussion phase of this unit so additional feedback is welcome. It could even be suggestions on a completely different unit that the Protoss can use to make the game more exciting for everyone.
Mothership Core’s Photon Overcharge ability now hits both ground and air again. Because of the resource changes we’re currently testing, Protoss is most impacted as they’re the ones that struggle the most with taking additional bases. We felt this nerf was no longer needed because to this.
Immortal Barrier ability is an upgrade The Barrier ability combined with the new ranged pick up from Warp Prisms has been too difficult to defend against without having air units. We’re currently testing having the ability as an upgrade. We may need to make tweaks to improve the ability if needed, but this is something we’ll look at going forward.
We're going backwards and/or in the wrong direction here. I don't understand what you're doing. LotV is your last chance to finally fix the massive mess that is Protoss since the first days of WoL. Last chance. After that it will be too late.
I read stuff about 300 gas (lol) Disruptors. I read stuff about PO still in the game, Warpgate still there, Colossi still there. I read stuff about a new "harass unit" when Oracles, Phoenixes, DTs, Prisms, Zealot raids and Blink Stalkers already exist. I read stuff about another Faerie Dragon Phase shift ability. I still witness that dangerous obsession about Protoss having a braindead dedicated anti-Tank unit. All of this needs to go. Protoss does not need any more weird, wonky niche units that eventually all end up revolving- around the same bad old deathball model. Protoss needs to be normalized.
Before thinking about new stuff, fix what already exists. You can't build anything on top of fragile foundations. Why not start by reworking those:
WARPGATE Removed as the standard Protoss production. The Warpgate upgrade can be moved anywhere. Pylons cannot receive warp-ins anymore; see below with Tempests.
MSC - Removed from the game; this unit is a disgrace to Starcraft. The HotS Mothership can stay for teamgames/lategame PvX.
Protoss should be able to operate without PO. PvT is much better without this, and with Warpgate gone PvP should be fine.
ZEALOT - "Charge" ability removed. - Passive boost to movement speed increased (final value would be anywhere from 3.5 to 4). - Damage point and attack backswing animation can be changed at will to balance the interaction between Zealots chasing bio or Roaches hitting & running.
Behold the birth of Zealot micro in large engagements.
SENTRY - Removed from the Gateway (still unlocked by Core though). - Each Nexus can now build one Sentry that remains attached to that Nexus. - Same abilities as before, except Guardian Shield is a targetted AoE spell.
This way, Protoss would have a compensation in defender's advantage, but not one that is abusable since it would remain around their bases—and around their bases alone. Cost (resources/supply) can be tweaked.
IMMORTAL - Removed from the Robotics. - Hardened Shields removed. - Added to the Gateway as a 80/100, 2 supply, 4 or 4.5 range unit dealing 20 damage to Armored targets. - 100/100 range upgrade at Core tech, increasing the final range to 6. Tweak search time accordingly.
STALKER Can now be further differentiated from the Immortal-Dragoon: cost, production time, damage point, attack, Blink, movement speed—everything can be tweaked to make it more like a mobile raider now that another unit fulfills the role of a stronger and sturdier medium-ranged shooter. Besides, the bad synergy with the MSC has been broken and the snowballing effect of Warpgate reinforcements are no longer there, so there is actually much more freedom to change the unit.
ARCHON - No more bonus damage against biological targets. - Damage changed to 30 + 3 against everything.
Maybe implement some kind of semi-gliding shot, i.e. the Archon doesn't fully decelerate before attacking (so an issued order at this time can make him keep better with retreating ranged units). Can also lower the damage point so it has better synergy with Prisms.
HIGH TEMPLAR - Storm damage changed from 80 damage over 4 seconds (20 dps) to 90 damage over 6 seconds (15 dps).
Reasoning: - Strong but slightly less devastative against light infantry; - Better zoning power; - Better against medium/large targets such as Roaches, Marauders, Protoss units overall; - Better Storm drops against workers; - Better against stationary targets such as Sieged Tanks or Lurkers.
DARK SHRINE Removed from the game. Dark Templars are unlocked by the Templar archives. Remember, they're no longer being warped in or near your base; no more low-skill fluke wins with random DT rushes. Besides, it would add clarity to the game: no one would proxy a building that important in a dark corner of the map. As a result, Dark Templars could probably be made slightly cheaper (cost and/or production). Also adds harassing options to the Templar tech.
COLOSSUS
On November 11 2014 21:19 TheDwf wrote: That's nice, but instead of nerfing they should completely remake it. The Colossus suffers from everything that is wrong in SC2: supply inflation, anticonceptual unit (= artillery without the weaknesses of an artillery), poor microability, horrible interactions, exponential growth of firepower leading to deathball play...
- Supply should be reduced from 6 to 4. - Cost should be decreased (e. g. 200/150); same for the range upgrade if it's kept (100/100 or 150/150). The range should be anywhere from 7-8 (native, depending on the existence of a range upgrade or not) to 9-10 (with the upgrade). - Decrease production time. - Decrease mobility (remove cliffwalking, decrease movement speed). This is a piece of artillery and in some situations it arrives faster than regular "infantry" ... Besides, it would promote Prism usage (which, by the way, should not get this weird distance lifting, there's a reason dropships have to be close to the target they pick...). - Decrease attack speed. - Change damage accordingly; of course it should still slaughter low hit points targets such as workers, Marines, Zerglings and keep a good efficiency against medium hit point targets such as Marauders, Roaches, etc. - Change the form of the splash. Instead of a line that naturally spouses the enemy concave, promoting a-move instead of focusing (micro), change it to a normal impact like the Siege Tank or the Reaver so that hitting clumps is rewarded. - Lose the vulnerability to anti-air. The shift focus contest between Corruptors/Vikings and Stalkers to determine how long Colossi are going to live is insanely bland. Not only this allows a much needed reworking of Corruptors and Vikings, but it also breaks the fact the same anti-air simultaneously deals with Prisms and Colossi and Carriers. - Thanks to this we can decrease hit points now that they're no longer vulnerable to medium or long distance anti-air. Artillery should be fragile. - Of course it would no longer hover over other units (end of the aesthetically horrible cluster of units) nor give air vision, since it's no longer consider an air unit.
WARP PRISM - Renamed War Prism. - Removed Phase Mode. No more possibilities to warp anything. - 80/80, 200 minerals, 40 seconds. - Increase acceleration (important). - Increase movespeed slightly, to 3 or 3.25.
No picking from the other side of the universe gimmick; just a basic, functional Shuttle. Remember that this Protoss is no longer heavily dependent on robo production time (and thus can afford more Observers and/or Prisms). Terrans or Zergs would also no longer build anti-air (Vikings, Corruptors) from the get-go because Colossi would no longer be an air unit. An accelerated energy regeneration upgrade for its cargo could also be tested for better synergy with Archon drops (?).
ORACLE Should decrease the cost (resources/supply), slightly increase range and free Terran from the 6 Marines constraint in early game PvT (should be down to 4-5); the effect of an Oracle on an unprotected mineral line should be weaker. Revelation is interesting but it should be mechanically more demanding (i.e. the spell should cost 25 mana and the effect should not last one minute to begin with). The Stasis stuff seems interesting and could be used to set tactical traps, but it should not last 3 years nor affect 50 units at the same time either.
CARRIER - Increase native armor by 1. - Decrease production time by 10-15 seconds. Interceptors need to be more robust. They should have a single attack and not a double one (e. g. 8x1 or 9x1 instead of 5x2 as of now). They should regenerate when coming back to the Carrier. I don't know if the leash micro has been properly implemented—didn't they put a half-arsed variant?
TEMPEST Now that the Carrier has finally reclaimed its capital ship role with a siege component, the Tempest can get a new identity and be the support of the "teleporting race" theme with Recall/Warpgate. There you can go with an actual 300 gas cost, because it fits the theme of a powerful lategame air unit! You could for instance implement:
- Recall: 125 energy, teleports 6 units beneath the Tempest. - Phase mode: 100 energy, the Tempest can warp gate units like the current Prism does.
Remove Medivac boost (no more PO or Warpgate, huge positive effect on TvT); Mines reworked as 1 supply zoning unit (support instead of core, Tanks would have to come back in TvZ); Hellbats removed/weakened (mech should not have an easy counter to Zealot; also would fix a bit the bio vs mech relationship in HotS); Remove muta regen (so there is a non-Phoenixes solution to mutas; positive effects on ZvT); Keep an eye on Roaches max and the impact of Speedlings on early game ZvP (since there are no more Sentries).
CONSEQUENCES: - A normalized race freed from the deathball syndrome; - Possibilities of a standard game play based around multitasking and harassment; - Much higher microability of all standard units; - Combined with the disparition of Warpgate timings and the increased complexity of positioning (no more warp-ins to salvage mistakes) and management rally, the skill floor of the race would be considerably increased; - There would be diversity in TvP!
Depth in simplicity please. Come on Blizzard, make Protoss the race of proud and fiery warriors it deserves to be!
Considering it's TheDwf, it's not as completely anti-Protoss as you might expect. I agree with a lot of it, especially the general theme that Protoss is becoming more and more gimmicky the further along the SC2 timeline we get. Gateway units need to be beefier, the MSC is fucking retarded especially in early-game PvP and a caster like the Sentry shouldn't be the backbone of an army. I disagree with:
WARPGATE Removed as the standard Protoss production. The Warpgate upgrade can be moved anywhere. Pylons cannot receive warp-ins anymore; see below with Tempests.
I like that Protoss produces units differently to other races. It promotes the idea that we have three very different races. I also believe that Warpgate is the reason a lot of people choose to play Protoss in the first place, I strongly feel that it shouldn't be removed from being an early-game upgrade. However, I do feel that offensive warp-ins can be too strong and make it difficult to balance Gateway units properly, especially if the Immortal is given the new role that you suggest. The best solution would be to make it so that you can only warp-in within the radius of a Warpgate or a Nexus.
On December 19 2014 06:23 [PkF] Wire wrote:
On December 19 2014 01:50 TheDwf wrote:
One thing I strongly disagree with you : warp-in is the mechanic that makes Protoss production interesting and different from T and Z, it should remain the standard way to produce. However, I agree offensive warp-ins should be weakened. Is it that hard to make it so that the further a unit is warped from the associated warpgate, the longer it takes for it to warp in (and optionally the more damage it takes) ? Defensive warp-ins remain as they are, and offensive warpgate timings don't exist anymore, with a now clear defender advantage.
Even if we weaken or get rid of offensive warp-ins the way you suggest, I don't like Warpgate as the standard way to produce because:
1. It mitigates too much mild positioning failures. I don't like the fact you can use a round of warp-in to deal with a ling raid or a small drop even if you're completely out of position. Pre-positioning should be more important and positioning mistakes should be punished accordingly. It also provides a stronger incentive for activity and map control, as one of the ways you don't get caught out of position is to make sure your opponent is too busy for that. Offense is the best defence. Of course the HotS theme of over-mobility (boost Medivacs, faster mutas with regen) has to go for that, but I included that.
2. Adding the constraint of constant production and a harder rally management raises the mechanical difficulty of the race. As of now, one of the signs of great Protoss macro is… not do anything at times, because you're skipping rounds of warp-ins or banking for future cycles of production (besides, I don't like how this functions as a built-in "greed" feature; hence the previous 1 gate tech into +5 gates builds in PvT). Rain has really great macro, and I have yet to read constant praises from viewersfans about this. Similarly, I am under the impression that people don't see or see less Zest's weakness in PvT regarding this. Terran and Zerg are better designed in this regard (more units to produce, individually cheaper = more actions to perform), so Protoss could do with an upgrade here.
3. Last but not least, if Protoss is to be made a micro-intensive race, it means you have to watch/babysit carefully your units in fight. This does not go well with the necessity to switch your camera to one of your Nexus to produce. Imagine for instance if Terran had to do that in TvZ fights: sorry for the 20 Marines pack, no more time to declump, hf with the banes, I have to produce!
Besides, sentry attached to the Nexus seems mostly nonsensical and I don't really get why you want to change the archon vs bio damage.
Well, I tried to reuse the Sentry the best I could. I think it can be interesting to provide that boost to Protoss' defender's advantage; plus it allows differentiation between aggressive and macro builds, and decisions between using energy to scout/create spotters or banking mana for defensive purposes (just like now, except the decision is more important since you have less Sentries to begin with). As I said, it would be like the Orbital/PF upgrade for CCs, or you could think of it as a Queen near its Hatchery. Don't see what's so shocking/gimmicky with the concept, but well, if you don't want it…
The Archon change is to balance how the unit performs vs bio, bio/Tanks and mech: slightly weaker than now against bio (and bio/Tanks since bio units are still the core here), slighly better against mech (remember that the current Immortal is gone in this scenario) and air (including Medivacs).
1. No it doesn't. This is a total myth. First of all, it assumes Warpgates are always off cool-down, which isn't true. Second of all, it ignores the fact that the optimal way to defend drops is by leaving units to defend, not relying on desperation warp-ins. Besides, Speedivacs remove punishment for getting yourself into fights you shouldn't have, but I guess it's fine when Terran can get out of making positional mistakes...
2. The ability to queue units really adds a lot to the macro intensity of a race and makes it harder to play. More seriously, do you really think Protoss players aren't capable of doing that? We already do it with Robo or Stargate units. We don't constantly warp-in Gateway units because they're shit, not because we're incapable of it. Ironically, since Warpgates can't be queued, it's actually harder to constantly make Protoss units than it is to make Terran units. Maybe queues on Terran buildings should be removed if you're so worried about unit production being easy?
3. You actually have a point here... except your argument relies on the assumption that Protoss doesn't require micro already and that makes you wrong.
You're approaching this discussion with a misplaced "racial warfare" mindset.
1. I didn't say Warpgates are always available, nor did I claim that Protoss doesn't have to split/position his units at all. There's no need for inappropriate hyperboles here. Accusing me of double standards regarding this when I said Medivac boost should be removed as well is stupid.
2. Excellent point about Goody, thanks; I forgot it in my pro-gates argumentation. The queueing system indeed creates a tension between "underqueuing" (= risks of gap in the production) and "overqueuing" (= inefficient spending of resources). The middle ground is very difficult to find and that's why we can admire Bomber/Bogus/Flash/etc. while we laugh when Goody has 5 Thors per fact. Warp removes that since you can't saturate Warpgates. No offense but people who claim "Terran macro is easy because you can queue" are generally those who never offraced; go play a 4M macro TvZ and do come back afterwards to tell us that queuing 45 units per minute without gap or excessive overlap during a prolonged lapse of time is easy/comfortable. I didn't say Protoss players were incapable of queuing, random jab once again… Robo and Stargate produce at most 1-2 units per minute and units coming from there often barely represent 10-15% of your army. But now, since you bring this, good point: what's harder, constantly producing Zealots from Warpgates with an icon telling you when Warpgates are ready or having your Voids from 3 Stargates perfectly chrono'ed and queued? [I add chrono in this example to simulate the constraint of a regular macro action which must be done every X seconds.] I want Protoss to move towards that last direction. No more no less.
On December 19 2014 21:23 Grumbels wrote: A question out of curiosity. I thought it would be obvious that the reaper's weakness past early game could be amended by giving them a mid-game upgrade. A prime candidate would be combat shields: it does not come so early as to affect various reaper rushes and it can be argued that the unit is too squishy later on anyhow. However, there is a potential stumbling block in implementing this because there is a precedent for combat shields to effect some graphical change in marines and this might require a similar adjustment to the reaper model. So while allowing reapers to benefit from combat shields might seem like a harmless option to experiment with, there are hidden costs. Even if Blizzard thought of this change they have to question whether they can make the reaper model work with shields, whether the gameplay benefits (more reaper use) will compensate for the resources expended in creating the model, and so on. Am I overthinking this?
I don't think you can make Reapers useful by midgame without implementing some kind of odd concept from a costly upgrade, simply because they cost 50m 50g and take a long time to produce. I suggested this before the last patch:
On July 02 2014 21:42 TheDwf wrote: Nitro Packs Researched from: Tech Lab Barracks Cost: 150m 150g 140s Requirements: Factory.
Effects: increases the Reaper's movement speed to 4.25 and restores their WoL attack. [WoL attack: same as the current one except +5 bonus damage to Light; secondary attack against buildings: 30 (+3). Both range 5.]
Target: lategame TvP, lategame TvZ. Fairly straighforward. As of now, the Reaper has absolutely no use past early game. With this upgrade, it could be used in lategame, particularly in TvP to defend Zealots/DTs harassement and pressure remote expands without committing Medivacs.
Reapers would probably remain marginal, but well, at least the possibility would be there in some lategame scenarii.
I think it's difficult to find a good upgrade for the reaper. The unit already has various quirks: jet packs, combat drugs, very high initial speed for a T1 unit, high build time. I doubt it's a good idea to add even more gimmicks to the unit. I also don't think the unit is an unqualified success to be able to fulfill one role in the early game only after very obtrusive design efforts by Blizzard.
I'm not sure what's wrong with the concept of a cliff-jumping unit that it should prove so difficult for Blizzard to balance the reaper. Obviously cliff-jumping is broken at the start of the game, but it should not be too complicated to work around this. (giving health regeneration, which is also broken at the start of the game and worthless late-game probably does not help the unit though)
We should still take into account that if a game requires more and more micro, at one point progamers will not play the game anymore as they would have to retire really early and it's not worth the time and investment. People lose their micro capacity pretty fast after the age of 25 (so I have heard). So if the game requires a lot of micro, player in their late 20s will not do well despite their experience in the game and more and more player will retire early and without much cash in their pockets to be worth it.
I know a lot of micro battles are fun, but let's not go overboard. We have to think of the player in the pro scene too at some point, as "the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena."
As it is now, reapers can't fight and can't run. There were so many opportunities to improve this unit that were given to other units: medivac boost, cyclone shoot-while-moving, herc splash damage upgrade, etc. The only thing that's left is some kind of lockdown ability that could mechanical units like tanks or disruptors, or buildings. God knows terran is going to need it with the disruptor the way it is.
What if reapers can lay bombs. For damage, for knockback or something else. Since the herc knockback effect is to countermicro for the enemy, these bombs could trigger after 1sec and reapers would need to be in melee range to plant it.
If cliffjumping becomes to broken with a buffed reaper, just make it an upgrade. Why not change the cost of reaper to?
With bombs, the synergy would be there with marines versus zerglings. Could be cool to maybe micro these bomb reapers versus roaches or stalkers. Like vultures vs dragoons in bw.
While we are at it, what about the ghost? I feel its pretty lame the ghost is there purely for its emp ability. Like it exists to hardcounter other stuff.
On December 20 2014 06:21 swissman777 wrote: We should still take into account that if a game requires more and more micro, at one point progamers will not play the game anymore as they would have to retire really early and it's not worth the time and investment. People lose their micro capacity pretty fast after the age of 25 (so I have heard). So if the game requires a lot of micro, player in their late 20s will not do well despite their experience in the game and more and more player will retire early and without much cash in their pockets to be worth it.
I know a lot of micro battles are fun, but let's not go overboard. We have to think of the player in the pro scene too at some point, as "the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena."
That's nonsense. Pro players retire early in general because they either tire of the game, decide to do something else with their life, don't make enough money, or less commonly because of injuries. Age don't play a part in it when it comes to micro potential.
On December 20 2014 06:21 swissman777 wrote: We should still take into account that if a game requires more and more micro, at one point progamers will not play the game anymore as they would have to retire really early and it's not worth the time and investment. People lose their micro capacity pretty fast after the age of 25 (so I have heard). So if the game requires a lot of micro, player in their late 20s will not do well despite their experience in the game and more and more player will retire early and without much cash in their pockets to be worth it.
I know a lot of micro battles are fun, but let's not go overboard. We have to think of the player in the pro scene too at some point, as "the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena."
That's nonsense. Pro players retire early in general because they either tire of the game, decide to do something else with their life, don't make enough money, or less commonly because of injuries. Age don't play a part in it when it comes to micro potential.
Yeah, if starcraft is chess+piano+poker combined, then there is ample precedent for continuing into middle-age. I just think that keeping up with the nosleepplay20hoursaday schedule Koreans have becomes literally physically exhausting at some point facilitating burnout at which point they go into the military and never recover.
On December 20 2014 07:25 Foxxan wrote: What if reapers can lay bombs. For damage, for knockback or something else. Since the herc knockback effect is to countermicro for the enemy, these bombs could trigger after 1sec and reapers would need to be in melee range to plant it.
If cliffjumping becomes to broken with a buffed reaper, just make it an upgrade. Why not change the cost of reaper to?
With bombs, the synergy would be there with marines versus zerglings. Could be cool to maybe micro these bomb reapers versus roaches or stalkers. Like vultures vs dragoons in bw.
While we are at it, what about the ghost? I feel its pretty lame the ghost is there purely for its emp ability. Like it exists to hardcounter other stuff.
Didn't reapers have an ability essentially the same as corrosive bile (ravager's ability) in Starbow at some point? You would throw a grenade and x seconds later it would explode to hit ground units?
On December 20 2014 07:25 Foxxan wrote: What if reapers can lay bombs. For damage, for knockback or something else. Since the herc knockback effect is to countermicro for the enemy, these bombs could trigger after 1sec and reapers would need to be in melee range to plant it.
If cliffjumping becomes to broken with a buffed reaper, just make it an upgrade. Why not change the cost of reaper to?
With bombs, the synergy would be there with marines versus zerglings. Could be cool to maybe micro these bomb reapers versus roaches or stalkers. Like vultures vs dragoons in bw.
While we are at it, what about the ghost? I feel its pretty lame the ghost is there purely for its emp ability. Like it exists to hardcounter other stuff.
Didn't reapers have an ability essentially the same as corrosive bile (ravager's ability) in Starbow at some point? You would throw a grenade and x seconds later it would explode to hit ground units?
reapers had grenades during development stage of wol, they functioned very differently though, more as an anti building thing.
Btw i recommend to every SC enthusiast to rewatch some of the earliest sc2 demos. It's really cool to see how things evolved since then. Also I was able to relive the hype of that time which was very enjoyable!
On December 20 2014 07:25 Foxxan wrote: What if reapers can lay bombs. For damage, for knockback or something else. Since the herc knockback effect is to countermicro for the enemy, these bombs could trigger after 1sec and reapers would need to be in melee range to plant it.
If cliffjumping becomes to broken with a buffed reaper, just make it an upgrade. Why not change the cost of reaper to?
With bombs, the synergy would be there with marines versus zerglings. Could be cool to maybe micro these bomb reapers versus roaches or stalkers. Like vultures vs dragoons in bw.
While we are at it, what about the ghost? I feel its pretty lame the ghost is there purely for its emp ability. Like it exists to hardcounter other stuff.
Didn't reapers have an ability essentially the same as corrosive bile (ravager's ability) in Starbow at some point? You would throw a grenade and x seconds later it would explode to hit ground units?
Yep! Exactly right.
Other things that could be tried for Reapers - giving them mines that must be manually detonated like Banelings (to provide buffer zone for your own tanks, mines' lack of mobility doesn't synergize with bio), giving them permanent flight and an anti-air attack (make them mini-Mutalisks), giving them a Lockdown-type ability that affects armored and massive ground units (helps bio against tank/lurker/ultra/disruptor/colo), giving them the Overseer's Contaminate, giving them an attack that can physically destroy resources (eg, attacking minerals destroys 3 minerals in that patch per attack).
Zerg AA vs. mass air strategies We’re currently trying out an ability on the Viper to help deal with large numbers of air units (but not small numbers of them). This new ability deals an AoE dot to enemy air units. If only a few air units are in play, it’ll be easy for the opponent to micro against this ability, whereas when the air unit count gets really high, dealing with this ability will be exponentially more difficult.
We’ve tried out abilities like this in the past and we’ve experienced a couple problems. Counter micro on the opposing side is to just kill the unit that has the DoT on it. This is problematic, because it’s not difficult to just select everything you have and kill the one afflicted unit. Design wise, this type of enemy reaction is also problematic because it just becomes a doom type spell, and not the spell we’re going for. To solve this, we’ve tried versions in the past where burst damage goes through if the unit is killed. The problem in this case is that I can then cast this spell on the enemy unit and quickly focus fire it down.
In order to solve both of these issues, we’re trying a version where if you use the ability, the effect is applied to the enemy air unit, but if the unit is killed before the DoT damage expires, the DoT damaging effect still remains flying in the air at the location where the unit died. This way, the optimal move for the opposing player is to move the affected unit away from the other units rather than just killing it. On the user’s side, it’s slightly more effective to have the affected unit move around with the DoT damage, than to have the DoT damage remain stationary, so there’s little incentive to quickly focus fire the affected unit down.
We haven’t had as much testing with this ability yet, and we’re not even sure if the Viper is the correct unit for this ability, but the general idea of exploring a late game Zerg AA vs. mass air armies is something we’re focusing on.
How about you redesign the entire air fleet of protoss. These tempests can kite vs hydras infinite off-creep. This is really boring to watch. Is the design intent here that zerg needs infestors or corruptors against these tempests?
Not sure why u dont want ground units to work such as the hydralisk. Its not fun if the race is forced to build hardcounter. If the race needs x unit or else it will not work to engage/attack/poke, its such a high limit on gameplay imo.
Same with the voidray, the unit relationships are so dull overall, i am not sure why u believe the air fleet of protoss is fun? Or is it because of balance purposes?
Voidray is essentially a deathball unit. The toss amove this unit with support of hightemplar/forcefield. What can zerg do against this?
The oracle seems to be a cool unit in lotv. Choice between damage or vision in the early game. Good scout unit. In lategame it has utility with its new mine. If terran would need less than 6marines here it could be a fun unit overall.
When something limits the other race it become dull. Its fun when it is about unit interactions. Choices.
The phoenix is another unit i dislike. Protoss opens this unit and its forced damage. I feel like none of these air units have a fun relationship. The necessity that protoss needs phoenix vs mutas is something that is really lame to on top of this.
Hope you really reconsidder to redesign the air fleet of protoss. Hell, maybe the other races to. When you need air unit to deal with a dropharass or the other guys air, its usually not fun. The core units should be able to do more of its job, maybe not perfect but still doable. That creates alot of action and more decisions.
If you insist of going this route to bring some additional power for zerg vs air fleets. Perhaps you could considder to do that with a ground unit. Example: Maybe the swarmhost can shoot "scourges" from broodwar. So they have two modes. One air mode and one ground mode. Groundmode=locust like now Airmode=They shoot scourges.
Good defence against this would be archons since they splash good.
On December 19 2014 21:23 Grumbels wrote: A question out of curiosity. I thought it would be obvious that the reaper's weakness past early game could be amended by giving them a mid-game upgrade. A prime candidate would be combat shields: it does not come so early as to affect various reaper rushes and it can be argued that the unit is too squishy later on anyhow. However, there is a potential stumbling block in implementing this because there is a precedent for combat shields to effect some graphical change in marines and this might require a similar adjustment to the reaper model. So while allowing reapers to benefit from combat shields might seem like a harmless option to experiment with, there are hidden costs. Even if Blizzard thought of this change they have to question whether they can make the reaper model work with shields, whether the gameplay benefits (more reaper use) will compensate for the resources expended in creating the model, and so on. Am I overthinking this?
I don't think you can make Reapers useful by midgame without implementing some kind of odd concept from a costly upgrade, simply because they cost 50m 50g and take a long time to produce. I suggested this before the last patch:
On July 02 2014 21:42 TheDwf wrote: Nitro Packs Researched from: Tech Lab Barracks Cost: 150m 150g 140s Requirements: Factory.
Effects: increases the Reaper's movement speed to 4.25 and restores their WoL attack. [WoL attack: same as the current one except +5 bonus damage to Light; secondary attack against buildings: 30 (+3). Both range 5.]
Target: lategame TvP, lategame TvZ. Fairly straighforward. As of now, the Reaper has absolutely no use past early game. With this upgrade, it could be used in lategame, particularly in TvP to defend Zealots/DTs harassement and pressure remote expands without committing Medivacs.
Reapers would probably remain marginal, but well, at least the possibility would be there in some lategame scenarii.
The reaper is one of the units that bothers me the most - not beause its incredibly bad or makes the gameplay worse like the MSC, sentry or colossus. It's because nobody ever fuckign builds them past the first scout(s). That's not enough reason to exist for a unit in SC2 IMO.
My idea would be to give the reaper an upgrade that allows it to place one widow mine. I think the widowmine is a crappy "unit" and this way they become less weird due to their limited production and the inability to relocate them, that plus making the reaper useful again. it should probably also get a very slight damage increase (maybe together with the nitro packs). But I know terran players probably love their mine so whatever :p
Actually in the HotS beta I asked that Blizzard would revert the Reaper to WoL Reaper, but remove Tech Lab requirement. So that it could have more lategame utility with the Building Grenades, as well as powerful harass in the early game. They did remove the Tech Lab requirement, but I'm actually glad they kept the Combat Healing, it makes it so the more multitask the player has, the better the Reapers become. Still think they could have lategame Grenades though.
Wow, so much Protoss hatred there. Specially considering that other races have a big maxing/spamming units potential.
For the comment of air fleet, I think that protoss has an interesting set of air units, the most interesting air set of the game. Most of them are specifically designed, with low damage against everything that they don't counter directly, expensive, and quite weak, adding a need of progression or switch. They rely on upgrades or fancy abilities. Just the opposite of bio, which has strong potential against everything and easily masseable. Or mutas, which are a number unit, mass them, start disrupting the enemy. What the Void Ray needs is some speed or micro potential, and also a new AI to maintain the range close to 6 (pursuit attack) to create more useful Voidrays, that could be more dangerous but also exploited to be dragged. Tempest simply needs a bit less range and tweaks to its new ability, and maybe be rebuilt with + damage vs buildings.
Again, the Terran thing is that they don't need to use a big set of high tech units to achieve huge strength. The reaper upgrade to have the WoL antibuilding attack creates micro efficient packs other than drops, so they add some new types of micro and harass to Terran. I don't see why diversity being an option is so disliked. More damage or health could be interesting, too. Specially inespecific damage, up to 6x2 or 7x2. WIth it being stronger than a marine but less efficient vs armor than a marauder, it's not a bad option. Reaper stutter step + Herc knockback could be worth considering.
On December 19 2014 07:25 TheDwf wrote: 2. Adding the constraint of constant production and a harder rally management raises the mechanical difficulty of the race. As of now, one of the signs of great Protoss macro is… not do anything at times, because you're skipping rounds of warp-ins or banking for future cycles of production
This is one of the points where the mindset of a protoss and that of a terran will really diverge. You present this as an inconvenient and I would say it's an advantage.
Certainly you can expose your macro skills by producing units constantly, and separate yourself from people who are incapable of producing units as constantly as you. That is just a basic fact, and it's impressive to have flawless macro, nobody in these forums should be denying that.
I would counter that having to choose whether you want to produce units or not is also a skill, and that it adds depth to the game. As someone who is more into the S part of RTS than the RT part, those are the aspects I'm drawn to. Basically, I am more attracted to what you can do with your brain than to what you can do with your fingers and muscle memory.
The problem is that this isn't always clear: when you forget a round of warp-in and when you willingly don't warp-in, the result is the same (units aren't made), so it's not as evident whether the player knows what he's doing as when you're just looking at whether the barracks are constantly producing or not. You can just stumble into having the right amount of gateway units, which you can't with a bioball obviously.
One of my favorites games is when San brained Hydra on Polar Night at IEM, by showing a certain amount of zealots to pressure, so Hydra would build just the right amount of zerglings to beat that, and right after he was done cleaning up and started droning again, nine zealots arrived at his natural... The caster's in-game reaction was that they weren't sure whether that was done on purpose or not, because it's simply harder to tell, there's no in-game marker for that.
On December 19 2014 07:25 TheDwf wrote: 2. Adding the constraint of constant production and a harder rally management raises the mechanical difficulty of the race. As of now, one of the signs of great Protoss macro is… not do anything at times, because you're skipping rounds of warp-ins or banking for future cycles of production
This is one of the points where the mindset of a protoss and that of a terran will really diverge. You present this as an inconvenient and I would say it's an advantage.
Certainly you can expose your macro skills by producing units constantly, and separate yourself from people who are incapable of producing units as constantly as you. That is just a basic fact, and it's impressive to have flawless macro, nobody in these forums should be denying that.
I would counter that having to choose whether you want to produce units or not is also a skill, and that it adds depth to the game. As someone who is more into the S part of RTS than the RT part, those are the aspects I'm drawn to. Basically, I am more attracted to what you can do with your brain than to what you can do with your fingers and muscle memory.
The problem is that this isn't always clear: when you forget a round of warp-in and when you willingly don't warp-in, the result is the same (units aren't made), so it's not as evident whether the player knows what he's doing as when you're just looking at whether the barracks are constantly producing or not. You can just stumble into having the right amount of gateway units, which you can't with a bioball obviously.
One of my favorites games is when San brained Hydra on Polar Night at IEM, by showing a certain amount of zealots to pressure, so Hydra would build just the right amount of zerglings to beat that, and right after he was done cleaning up and started droning again, nine zealots arrived at his natural... The caster's in-game reaction was that they weren't sure whether that was done on purpose or not, because it's simply harder to tell, there's no in-game marker for that.
I wouldn't necessarily call it "Protoss" or "Terran" mindset since Protoss used to operate like that, and still partially does (robo/Stargate); besides, as far as I'm concerned, the SC2 revamp mutilated the identity of Protoss far more than it redefined it. In my argument, there's also a general stance about mechanical difficulty that isn't particularly specific to a race.
The point you raise is valid and I am aware of it, but for me the – still outweigh the +. A certain part of this "I decide not to produce" aspect, for instance, is already pre-incorporated into builds (which indeed makes their elaboration more complex, but not their execution). You also have to consider that skipping production is sometimes decided by default because of the exorbitant initial investment costs of some (required) tech paths; for example you can't produce constantly from gates when you have to pay 500/400 for your first Colossus. Last but not least, the queuing system can also decide to cut production for reasons X or Y, so it's not like that strategic/decision aspect is completely absent from it.