Dustin Browder, you are doing it wrong. - Page 4

On October 24 2011 09:21 konadora wrote:
YES totally agreed with the sound issue, been mentioning it ever since SC2 came out. everything sounds dull and undistinctive

On October 24 2011 01:57 Newbistic wrote:


I see what you're saying. I didn't make a distinction between simplistic as in the marine and simplistic as in marauder/roach. Basically, while both units are functionally simplistic, the role the marine fulfills is simple while the role the marauder fulfills isn't.

The marine is a weak, high-dps unit meant to be used en masse as the main army. They build fast, kill fast, die fast. If you watch over them they'll work wonders, but if you leave them unattended they can easily get rolled by speedling/banes or psi-storm or colossi lasers.

The marauder, on the other hand, fulfills too many roles very well. They don't fulfill any specific niche, they're just a good unit to have a bunch of all the time. They can sometimes replace the tank, sometimes replace the marine. If you leave them alone for a few seconds they won't die to banelings or psi storm. They simply allow Terran to be as offensive and defensive as they want with less effort. That's why the marauder isn't considered a "simplistic" unit, because their role isn't simple at all.

Roaches are similar to the marauder. You can mass a ton of them easily and they're pretty good in almost all situations. Roaches are basically the zerg version of the marauder. The mere fact that they're required in so many matchups makes the game less exciting than it potentially can be.

These are, of course, just a rough argument. I think the current balance state of WoL is actually quite admirable and we have definitely seen many fantastic games. But I feel that the general direction Dustin Browder takes in designing Starcraft 2 and the future expansions is flawed.

I too played Red Alert 2. At higher levels the game basically boils down to grizzly/rocketeer/US Paratroop vs rhino/flak and whoever can micro their tanks the best. In the rare game that makes it to late game Allies will transition to mirage/rocketeer. All the 50+ other units have their specific roles, but the main two units fulfill their roles so well you don't actually need to build the other units. That's simplicity done wrong.

On October 24 2011 14:20 ChineseWife wrote:
agreed. also does anyone cringe when david kim and browder use the term raid, referring to harass in sc2? For some reason that really bothers me and I guess shows me they are somewhat out of touch with the sc2 scene.

On October 24 2011 14:20 ChineseWife wrote:
agreed. also does anyone cringe when david kim and browder use the term raid, referring to harass in sc2? For some reason that really bothers me and I guess shows me they are somewhat out of touch with the sc2 scene.

The marauder, on the other hand, fulfills too many roles very well. They don't fulfill any specific niche, they're just a good unit to have a bunch of all the time

On October 24 2011 14:10 Azzur wrote:
I disagree - whilst I liked BW alot, I feel that SC2 is a superior game. In SC2, I found that there was a great focus on army control (e.g. positioning, jockeying for a superior concave, etc), whilst BW was a test of multi-tasking mechanics. In SC2 players need to make split-second decisions that will easily affect the outcome of the game. I didn't like some of the gimmicky micro-intensive units in BW (e.g. reaver).

I prefer TvZ in SC2 - I consider MM overpowered in BW since medics are so powerful marines can just stim all day. In SC2, stimming is a major decision. I didn't like the muta-stacking in BW because I find it counter-intuitive how mutas can just smack turrets all day. I didn't like science vessels in TvZ because it essentially allowed allows terrans to trade energy for armies, and how it essentially hard counters mutas tremendously. Contrast with TvZ in SC2 where a single unit doesn't make something totally obsolete.

In BW, I don't like the air balance - valkyries/devourers were not good enough and scouts are the BM units. Valkyries/devourers should've been the masters of the skies (e.g. counter even carriers / BCs) since they only serve 1 purpose (air-to-air).

SC2 has done very nice micro - stutterstep, marine splits, army maneuvers to obtain a better concave.

However, I do agree with the OP in that I'm not sold on the direction of HoTS yet - where the move is towards gimmicky / flashy units.

On October 24 2011 14:26 Dante08 wrote:


Not sure if trolling

On October 24 2011 14:22 Techno wrote:
Lotta hand waving at a concept that no one has really been able to figure out: Why is BW > SC2?

The answer is frankly SC2 would have to be in-fucking-credible to outshine the legend of BW. You don't want to hear this but its the only answer: Give it time.



Nope, not I anyways. They have their own jargon that they use cause they work all day together and discuss the game wayyyy more than you do. It bothers me way more how desperate everyone is to paint Browder/Kim/Blizzard with such negativity all the time. You guys take anything you can find and try to say "this is why SC2 sucks" with it. Its just a lil annoying after a while. Just admit it: your on TL right now 'cause SC2 kicks ass.

Thanks, Blizzard!

On October 24 2011 14:26 Dante08 wrote:


Not sure if trolling

On October 24 2011 14:33 myopia wrote:


You are misguided. I'm on TL right now because I loved BW and the community is awesome enough to keep me around despite my dislike of SC2.

The 'give it time' schtick no longer applies. It's had over a year. No number of new strats will overcome the marauder, roach, colossus, force field, thor, etc.. 'Giving it time' meant something to me when I thought HotS would make SC2 better. I don't like a single thing they revealed at Blizzcon. I don't care if it'll be tweaked before the next expansion is released - the very fact that they considered these ideas good enough to go public with is deeply concerning.

On October 24 2011 14:39 Techno wrote:

Frankly, I think there is no possible way you could be appeased, and even if you were, you would likely hide it. Lets pretend sc2 is actually C&C18 so we can finally stop yearning for our childhoods.

SC2 has only been out for a year. That is nothing!

Its not the actually dislike of sc2 that I have a grudge against, its people pretending to explain it.

On October 24 2011 14:56 myopia wrote:

Ad Hominem has never been a valid form of debate. It does not negate my post, which was little more than a rehash of the OP and countless other arguments that have been made against SC2 since the beta. This is how we feel.

On October 24 2011 14:39 Techno wrote:

Frankly, I think there is no possible way you could be appeased, and even if you were, you would likely hide it. Lets pretend sc2 is actually C&C18 so we can finally stop yearning for our childhoods.

SC2 has only been out for a year. That is nothing!

Its not the actually dislike of sc2 that I have a grudge against, its people pretending to explain it.