Tower Ranges

[Karawasa]

The tower ranges are;

6/8/10/12/16

These are conversions of WC3 ones which were;

500/700/900/1125/1500

I believe this did not work out as intended. They are too short in SC2. I propose;

7/9/11.5/14/18

Thoughts?

[Jello]

The tower ranges are;

6/8/10/12/16

These are conversions of WC3 ones which were;

500/700/900/1125/1500

I believe this did not work out as intended. They are too short in SC2. I propose;

7/9/11.5/14/18

Thoughts?

I feel that the conversions are not fully converted or at least scaled. the ratio's are what's throwing me off. 6/8/10 feels right for most of the towers as they hit about the same range as WC3 ( electricity tower has... 10? or 11? range in sc2 and hits exactly the same as wc3)

I feel that if the arrow/cannon(ray/grenade) are at 6 range and are for the most part accurate. however for light and dark towers with the 1500 range from wc3 arent the same ratio compared to the arrow towers. if arrow towers are 6, then light towers should be around 17-19. Light towers in the middle are barely even touching the bottom pass platform.

I would take screenshots but I am absolutely exhausted. Hope someone can expand on this by taking a screenshot of wc3 using the -range 1500 / -range 500 commands and then showing the same tower in sc2 and compare it's range. I feel this is the most accurate way of converting tower ranges.

[holepercent]

the short range towers feel right but the long range (wc3 1100-1500) towers don't cover the area they do..

(electricity tower is 1100 range.)

[Chiquihuite]

I think it's worth experimenting with, since tower range definitely plays into how "fun" they are to use. I'm not sure a range buff is needed across the board, though.

[Karawasa]

500

6

700

8

900

10

1125

12

1500

16

[Karawasa]

Based on the above, I propose;

8/10/12/16/22

Ranges were shorter than I thought in SC2.

[Rai]

considering 1125 and 16 look just about the same i vote for 8/10/12.5/16/21.5

[Moriquendu]

considering 1125 and 16 look just about the same i vote for 8/10/12.5/16/21.5

Looks reasonable. 16 and 1125 are roughly the same.

[pyrobob262]

none of the numbers work... Look at it this way, the largest range is 3 times the shortest, so SC2 would be 18, not 16. and if you up ray range to 7 then max would be 21. Ill take a better look at the range deal, but I would base max and min off that 3x multiple.

[BloodyOrange]

I noticed this one myself. If i remember well, lightning tower used to hit the creeps in the right lane when placed in the middle, which weakens it quite a bit. (it has the biggest effect on these critical ranges)

[Moriquendu]

the largest range is 3 times the shortest, so SC2 would be 18, not 16. and if you up ray range to 7 then max would be 21. Ill take a better look at the range deal, but I would base max and min off that 3x multiple.

It's possible that "range 0" is not actually "0 range from the unit", but "the melee range of the unit". So it's not necessarily a direct *3, because of the constant factor

(/\ pure guess, I don't know much about StarCraft editor and the actual settings, but I think it could be that way).

[Chiquihuite]

It's possible that "range 0" is not actually "0 range from the unit", but "the melee range of the unit". So it's not necessarily a direct *3, because of the constant factor

(/\ pure guess, I don't know much about StarCraft editor and the actual settings, but I think it could be that way).

Range in SC2 is based on the unit's "origin" point. In other words, the bottom-center of the unit. Even melee units have a range (and since it's based on their origin, larger melee units need a longer range).

[Moriquendu]

Ok, didn't know that. Thanks for clearing up.