SC2 concerns and issues (possible inclusion in monthly report to Blizzard)

Lol. Anyway, Remy, doesn't that argument work conversely?

Since the HY resources will be highly contestable, you also can't afford to allow them to fall into enemy hands...

Unless you think they're REALLY not worth it. I may be underestimating the amount that you find this to be worthless .

 

i think the hy expos are a really neat idea. very strategic and all, but having hy gas may be a bit too much. having your gas intake double is just huge. i really hope they don't double it.

 

@ Jon, Yes, but if you consider the potential locations of HY sites, it will be easier to harass than defend.  Instead of the expo site being close to the enemy starting main and a whole map's distance away from you, it will be half a map farther for the enemy and half a map closer for you.

With that in mind, and with HY minerals being the resources, it will only matter enough to go for one in early-game but players will not have the capabilities to secure it at that time.  Anything you put into defending the HY site, is what you are taking away from your starting main(or the expos close to it).  You not only will the HY site be a pain in the ass to defend, you are also putting your starting main(basically the game) at risk.  It's not unlike newbie Toss players placing the first cannons near the choke just to have rushing units run past it going straight for the probes.  But at the timing that you actually have the capabilities of securing one without risk losing too much, mineral would no longer matter as vespene gas will be the limiting factor.  The whole thing isn't very complicated, but I don't know why it spanned so many posts.

@ DontHate, It's not doubling your gas income.  It is possibly doubling the harvest rate at one of your vespene geysers if you can even keep it running long enough.

 

Mothership

Well I doubt anything I put here will change anything, besides the fact that I agree about the super unit agenda.


Thor

I see no reason to take out the thor. The terrans seems to be focusing on heavy fire and splash damage this time around and personally I believe that the thor will make a great addition. With the addition of so many versatile units to the terran fleet, I see nothing wrong with a unit that can not move over terrains. There must be something to counter balance the vikings, cobras, reapers, and whatever may follow. It leads to the dilemma, do I really want to spend those minerals on a thor? Is it really worth it?


Salvage

/


Cobra

Rather than adding speed and base damage as well as get rid of the multiplier all together, I think the cobra should receive an upgrade similar to the battle cruiser's plasma gun or the reapers time bomb. Making the cobra also customizable would allow the cobra to be used as specialty units. After the initial plasma against infantry or time mine against artillery, the move and shoot feature would be a great send off present. Although I should note I do not want entirely the same upgrades by no means.


Reaper v. Ghost

I think the ghost, a relatively quick build and upgrade, can take care of the anti-infantry. The drop pods with snipe and cloak, albeit all the upgrades may take a while, but one or another will do, is already effective against infantry.


Muta

Being a protoss user myself and faced many a muta rushes, I would agree with the 'nerf', however since nothing has been released from the zerg yet, and with terran already possessing an upgrade that allows double building, I would like to see the production speed of mutalisks and others before making any comment.


Splash

Mostly speculation so no real comment from me.


Pylon/Phase

/agreed

Edit: didn't see the second post XD


Gas/Minerals

I don't see any reason to give high yield gas, it would promote early expansion, safe guarding of vacines, and hesitancy on whether or not to build high tiered units that cost gas.


Tech lab and the like

I'll consider the employees of Blizzard competent on balancing work and let them handle it, especially, as I stated above, the zerg have not been released and they've admitted nothing is final.


Hit & Run

/again zerg


Queue

/zerg, not released, I'll wait before comment


D/C in team games

/agree


Flare

Don't know about this one, although it sounds extremely interesting to play it may overpower the terran as all of their units have range capabilities and this would score many free hits. Of course if balanced, I would love to see it implemented.


Repair

Although I agree with some points, I don't like the resolutions. It seems to generic to all races and you're trying to make all the races have similar abilities, which is not what SC should be like even remotely.


Stacking

/eh more to micro


Shockwave

Once again, if MS is not a super unit, I dunno, I'd rather see this as a DA spell... maybe people will actually build DAs now.

 

Meant to comment on this but didn't get around to it. I completely agree. That sounds like the perfect solution, altogether sounds much more useful as well.

 

Star Relic should come back. People prefer it to the Stasis orb some changes could be made
My cloaking idea:

The Star Relic produces a unit cloaking field like the arbiter as a passive ability and thus can cloak on the move.  It also is able to channel a building cloak field but becomes immobile and unable to fire while it is actively masking the buildings.  In this mode it will also hide any other Star relics that are not channeling.

A replacement option for cloaking would be to give the dark obelisk a cloaking option whereby you can buy an upgrade causing all obelisks to generate a cloaking field.  This would achieve the same effect as the Star Relic once did and the MS does now hiding your buildings.  It would not cost population points but would instead be rigid so you cannot move the field elsewhere without building a new Obelisk.

Warp Ray: Many post BlizzCon complaints revolved around units engaged by the WR flying out of its range before it could do any damage Here are some solutions
  Allow it to follow targets at half speed when firing so there is less trouble with units just flying away out of its range.  Also allow it to continue to fire at units 2-4 units further than the maximum range.  Both of these would help lessen the problems of units flying out of range before the WR gets charged up.
_________________________________________________
Lockdown To useful to lose but still needs to be at least mid level tech:
Make it an ability on the Nomad

It would take 3 hits to lockdown a MS
1st hit disables special abilities
2nd reduces fire and movement rates
3rd immobilized the unit

Large units would take 2 shots to disable
1st hit disables special abilities and reduces fire and movement rates
2nd immobilizes unit.
The units that take 2 hits are:  Battle cruiser, Thor, Carrier and Colossus.

All other units take one hit to disable.

 

at blizzcon siege tanks were 3 food each, so 2 siege tanks is the same as a thor. As for addons Im only going by what has been revealed.

 

Well that bombard is where the power lies. It can take out a building faster than 2 tanks when using it and can fire faster with the regular cannons.

 

Thor is not as big as the Colossus, so it does not need to be attacked by the turrets. It is a smaller unit than the Colossus, I mean it is large, but not long.

I do agree with the idea to lift the Thor up to lift it down on another island. why should this unit stay alone in an island?

 

the bombardment require energy, so it cannot be directly compared with the siege mode. it also means that the thor is vulnerable to emp and feedback, further justifies the use of the siege tank instead of the thor

 

Amen to that bReaker.

My mistake there, I was not aware of that.  I wonder if they're actually gonna keep it 3 food.  Is the siege tank damage changed to 100 per shot?  If it's 100, the increase in damage would actually be a slight decrease, in relation to food cost.  It would need to be 105 to keep it at the same damage per attack per supply as before.

Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying about the addons.

 

woops i meant salvage lol. Ye the siege tank is 100 damage to armored and 50 to other.

 

WHAT!? You mean in siege mode!? AND it's 3 food? I don't know if I should be sad for Terran or happy because I'm Zerg...

 

50 to other units with splash is something to be sad about? it'll one hit your lings and with the resulting splash (given that no siege tank goes it alone) will pwn any number of hydras. Whats to feel sad about?

 

The fact that it's no longer 70????

The splash is just a reduction... WOOO HOOO MY MINIONS SHALL RULE THE EARTH!

 

That's compared to 70 explosive splash per hit per TWO FOOD. Sad.

Like I said, to keep damage per hit per food equal to what it was before, it would have to be 105 per hit if tanks are now 3 food. So even 100 vs armored is actually a slight decrease. The 50 damage is much bigger cut. That's 47.62% of what SC1 siege mode firepower was in relation to unit food cost. What's not sad about that?

But no, I'm happy, cuz I'm Zerg.

 

Yea... Tanks are the bane of existence as a Zerg player. Pretty much annihilates chances of a decent ground strategy without air support....

 

remy ur not thinking clearly, before siege would kill only small units 1 hit, with 100 power the amount of units it can take out in one hit increases significantly, reducing the wait time between kills, makes more kills in less time= more effective against killing units quickly therefore its worth more.

 

its only 100 vs armoured, versing small units it is going to be way less effective, especially vs zealots (4 siege hits?). I think this is actually a good move by blizz becuase siege tanks were way overused in sc1, this means there might actually be some variety in mid game for terran in sc2

 

@ tweakismyname, While it kind of looks like that on paper, that's not really true in practice since you're not using just one siege tank.

At equal food, you are still doing less damage per round of fire.  If you had 6 food worth of tanks, that's two SC2 tanks or three SC1 tanks.  The SC2 tanks will deal 200 total combined damage per round of fire, while the SC1 tanks will deal 210.  The more tanks you have, the greater the margin that SC1 tanks have SC2 tanks.  So at equal food, SC1 tanks will always match what SC2 tanks can do, and then some.

In addition, it's actually also more efficient to divide up the same total damage up into more hits of smaller damage per hit.  Considering that you won't always fight units only with full health, especially not every hit, more damage goes to waste with SC2 tanks.  For instance if a unit had 50 HP left, a SC2 tank would waste 50 damage on the killing blow while a SC1 tank would only waste 20 damage.  Even in cases that require two hits of SC1 tanks fire when SC2 tank can deal the killing blow in one, it is still offset by the fact that the SC2 tank is worth more food.

So in actual gameplay, the SC1 tank is better than the SC2 tank.  Whether it's actual damage or efficiency.

GuiMontag, you need to keep in mind that SC1 tanks do not deal the full 70 vs a zealot.  It's only 50% which is 35 damage per round.  I believe that there is no such damage type in SC2, as the siege tanks deal the full 50 damage vs zealots and not 25(50%).  So while vs small units, there is a decrease, the drop in damage is actually the same as the maximum value.  It certainly isn't especially worse vs zealots.