EPT[HotS] The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - Page 8
| Blogs > Plexa |
|
Loser777
1931 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On September 07 2012 02:50 fabiano wrote: 1) Tanks are the identity of Terran. 2) They are the perfect example of great unit design, the option of removing tanks should never be considered. 3) If Blizzard takes out the tank, there is no hope for mech play because you can't get a mech-ier unit than the tank. 4) The tank has been fucked by Blizzard since Beta, through direct nerfs and indirect means like horribly designed units such as the immortal. 1 and 4 don't go together. It's obvious that Blizzard simply doesn't like Siege Tanks and that style of play. Keeping them in just drives them to create units like the Immortal and the Warhound. If someone doesn't like something, and yet they are "forced" in some way to keep it around, then their dislike of that something is going to be plainly visible. And that's going to make the product worse overall. SC2 would be better if they'd just removed STs back in SC2's development. Not because Siege Tanks are bad, but because Blizzard clearly doesn't want them around and only keeps them there because people believe in #1. If they'd taken them out, we could get them to make the game that Blizzard wants to make, instead of this horrible hybrid between the game they want and the game the fans want. At least that way, whatever we get would be pure and not this horrible compromise half-state state where STs are in the game, but so are crap units that exist solely to work around them. On September 07 2012 05:11 RaZorwire wrote: I've never understood that type of reasoning at all. The fact that there are big problems is no reason to ignore the small problems. And if you don't like discussing worker count displays, you could always just leave the discussion... True, small problems are still problems. However, if we solved the big problems, then the minor issue of workers and such would be effectively irrelevant. Or to put it another way, if Blizzard added more skill-based stuff to compensate for the lower worker macro, then that would still be a good thing. We could effectively ignore the lack of worker macro. It's like this. If SC2 has 60% of the skill ceiling that SC1 has, changing the worker stuff would only raise that to maybe 62%. Better, certainly. But if you could change something that increased it to 85%, that +2% is looking rather insignificant by comparison, yes? | ||
|
VTArlock
United States1763 Posts
It seems to me blizzard sat down at a table and said, "Ok guys, what seems like it would be cool?" ... "Sure, lets throw this stuff in and see what happens!" | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On September 07 2012 08:40 NicolBolas wrote: 1 and 4 don't go together. It's obvious that Blizzard simply doesn't like Siege Tanks and that style of play. Keeping them in just drives them to create units like the Immortal and the Warhound. If someone doesn't like something, and yet they are "forced" in some way to keep it around, then their dislike of that something is going to be plainly visible. And that's going to make the product worse overall. SC2 would be better if they'd just removed STs back in SC2's development. Not because Siege Tanks are bad, but because Blizzard clearly doesn't want them around and only keeps them there because people believe in #1. If they'd taken them out, we could get them to make the game that Blizzard wants to make, instead of this horrible hybrid between the game they want and the game the fans want. At least that way, whatever we get would be pure and not this horrible compromise half-state state where STs are in the game, but so are crap units that exist solely to work around them. True, small problems are still problems. However, if we solved the big problems, then the minor issue of workers and such would be effectively irrelevant. Or to put it another way, if Blizzard added more skill-based stuff to compensate for the lower worker macro, then that would still be a good thing. We could effectively ignore the lack of worker macro. It's like this. If SC2 has 60% of the skill ceiling that SC1 has, changing the worker stuff would only raise that to maybe 62%. Better, certainly. But if you could change something that increased it to 85%, that +2% is looking rather insignificant by comparison, yes? Its kinda sad how many GSL's and TvZs Browder has watched only to create more counters to the siege tank. TvZ and TvT, the only matchups where tanks are commonplace, and also the most (imo only) interesting matchups, yet somehow Browder still doesn't like tanks. Blizzard inventions like the Colossus, Xel Naga watchtowers, Immortal, have completely ruined the watchability of the game, yet for some reason, the blame still lies on the siege tank ("stale tank lines" - Browder), which everyone knows is actually what is the saving grace of SC2 right now. Dakim thinks a-move wins are cool, because he probably saw Flash a-move his army into Jaedong and win 3 times in a row with 14CC into goofy all-ins. Honestly they were the most underwhelming and disappointing finals I've ever watched, Flash ruined every single grand finals for me, except maybe the first. Not taking anything away from his strategic genius however. Now in SC2, you don't even need to take excessive risk to do that, which is the only thing that made Flash's wins interesting. If we didn't have siege tanks, TvT would look a lot more like PvP, with 200/200 balls of marines and marauders just smashing into each other into GG. | ||
|
FireBlast!
United Kingdom5251 Posts
Saddest thing for me is how predictable most of these disappointments were from the start. There are just too many "role-specific" niche units. Even worse, a lot of these units have niche abilities. (Entomb in particular is so unimaginative it's just embarrassing). | ||
|
SuPerFlyTNT
United States145 Posts
Many of the spells or units you are calling bad, you are calling bad for reasons I can't even comprehend. Let me give you some examples: You say that the Mothership Core's energize is really something a player would only want to use on a Mothership. You noted that it would be useless on chronoboost because 'since when has chronoboost been gamebreaking?' First of all - what the fuck does chrono being 'gamebreaking' or not have to do with anything? Second of all, can you really not imagine a build that uses energize on Nexi to get more chronoboost out to hit a faster timing with an upgrade that you can get faster than the opponent might have thought you could, etc - just generally hitting any timing faster or coming up with a new timing that you coudln't do without so much chrono. You also tallk about 'lol who cares' for energizing a sentry. I imagine it wouldn't be common but you do realize, I hope, that sometimes Toss' lose games because they dont have enough forcefields. I'm not saying its the most important thing ever but you keep brushing aside things like they're a joke. Another, and simpler, thing you said that is absurd is that giving Hydras speed does not 'increase their utility in any way.' Just quickly I can point out one way it does increase their utility - it increases their mobility......... How can you say that something moving faster doesn't give it more utility or help with any of their weaknesses? Casters are constantly saying 'Don't forget - when you engage with Hydra's, you can't run away because they're so slow.' Allow me to reiterate - 'because they're so slow.' You did go on to say that it only helps at hive (as a hive upgrade), at which point in the game Hydras are 'largely irrelevant.' I'd agree with you that in the current metagame Hydras are largely irrelevant during Hive tech. But in HotS, as I'm sure you know, Hydras can move faster. This introduces new utility in the form of *mobility* which might make them relevant in hive tech. Lastly about hydras - you talk about them still getting owned by Colossi. I totally agree its stupid the speed doesn't help them deal with their most significant counter from Protoss - similarly I find it annoying that the Mothership Core, when turned into a Mothership, will still be susceptible to Vikings. (You see I added the bit about the Mothership so that you would know I was being sarcastic about the Hydra/Colossus). What made me feel it was necessary to respond, and why I hope at least a couple people bother to read this, is that alot of your original post is just theorycrafting ways in which new HotS stuff won't work, when you could just as easily be theorycrafting how the exact same units and spells WILL work - consider what I said on energizing Nexi to chronoboost more and hit a new or unexpected timing. With that in mind, your post becomes nothing but unproductive - inspiring other people who have [also] not thought about these things properly - much less tested them thoroughly - to take up your opinions. The point is - you're an admin here. If you're going to make a post like this, put in some major disclaimers or at least imply that you THINK this isn't good for that reason, or that that isn't good for this reason, rather than stating it as though it were fact. Note the difference here: Your post is neither productive nor well thought out. -versus- I think your post is neither productive nor well thought out. Don't you think the second one is more appropriate? | ||
|
idkfa
United States77 Posts
Mothership Core - it was 13 range with hefty damage when docked to a nexus, and 7 range with reduced damage as a drifting cloud. I looked to this as something that would finally allow pvp to more safely permit fast expand builds and reduce volatility, following tvt and zvz. Purify hasn't been shown to enable this, but I think that could be corrected if reduced in cost to 50 energy. Furthermore, Mass Recall, at 150 energy, is so prohibitively cost that if you use the core for any other reason, you won't have recall available for venturing out for a long time. So right now, I disagree that this should be listed among "the good," but am hopeful it can be adjusted to belong there. Swarm Host - I'm fine with your appraisal. Same with worker counts. Re: The Neutral The Viper - I like this unit a lot more now that I've had a chance to see it in action, and I don't think its interaction with Recall to be a reason to keep it below "the good." I am fine with blinding cloud not affecting protoss - that is energy that it can put to use pulling colossi or immortals over forcefield walls and into harm's way anyway. I like strategic map deformation, and feelings about not getting cheap town hall kills doesn't mitigate this, so I'd also list this in "the good." Battle Hellions are something that haven't been well-explored by this point, and I have no strong feelings about them, so I agree with their placement in "the neutral." Same with Ultra Charge. Re: The Bad Automine workers - three points of contention. First and second are simple "come on, really?" responses to your bulleted points, but the third has to do with helping Starcraft 2 grow. Having recently reread Gheed's amusing tales of the Bronze league, anything that makes the game more accessible to people without Starcraft backgrounds can only be a good thing. I'd put this right alongside the (toggle-able) newbified command card, where it explains right-clicking versus a-clicking, and say they're good ideas. The Oracle - for the most part, spot-on, although I think that Revelation is a crucial addition to Protoss... but not at 200 gas. Hydra Speed - Dimaga seemed to be getting some use out of that, in combination with Swarm Hosts, and I agree that putting it in Lair is unnecessary, but it seems like most of the lamentation regarding Hydras is that their role in the game has been usurped by Roaches, leaving them as niche/specialist units. I'm not a romantic, in that sense, so I'd put this among "the neutral." Widow Mine - right now it's utterly outcompeted by the warhound to get a good grasp on how it'll shape the game, so I will simply reserve judgment on them. Immortals - I will take your stance a step further and say you were kind in listing it in "the bad," because they get such a raw deal against the new factory units. At their cost, in the immortal words of Dr. Evil (pun intended), "throw me a frickin' bone here!" Re: The Ugly Total agreement, and I don't know how Blizzard will salvage the situation - but at least regarding the warhound, David Kim has recently posted that they're aware problems exist. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On September 07 2012 10:55 idkfa wrote: Re: The Ugly Total agreement, and I don't know how Blizzard will salvage the situation - but at least regarding the warhound, David Kim has recently posted that they're aware problems exist. Why doesn't that fill me with confidence? First, the problems with the Warhound were seen even by people who never played HotS. Oh, people just said, "wait until HotS before you complain." Well guess what? Everyone said it was a boring, A-move unit before HotS, and everyone says it's a boring A-move unit now. Sometimes you don't need to play it to know that crap is crap. So if Blizzard has had this unit in the game for months, how is it that it has survived as long as it has? Again, this is not a new problem. If they needed us to tell them that their boring A-move unit is a boring A-move unit, then they've got more serious problems than the Warhound. Second, the fact that Blizzard recognizes a problem is only the beginning. Remember: the Warhound is in the game because Blizzard "recognized" that people want to be able to Mech in TvP. So they gave us a big Marauder. Thus missing the whole Goddamn point of Mech. Now personally, I dislike Mech play. I hated it in SC1, and I hate it now. But if Blizzard is going to encourage and endorse it, it can't just be "Factory units"; it needs to be its own individual style of play. And the This goes back to the whole "moving shot" fiasco, where people were asking for patrol/hold-position micro and got the Phoenix ability to move and shoot. Blizzard thought they were giving us what we wanted, but they didn't. So the fact that David Kim acknowledges a problem with a unit is not exactly filling me with confidence that it will be fixed well. | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
On September 07 2012 11:26 NicolBolas wrote: Why doesn't that fill me with confidence? First, the problems with the Warhound were seen even by people who never played HotS. Oh, people just said, "wait until HotS before you complain." Well guess what? Everyone said it was a boring, A-move unit before HotS, and everyone says it's a boring A-move unit now. Sometimes you don't need to play it to know that crap is crap. So if Blizzard has had this unit in the game for months, how is it that it has survived as long as it has? Again, this is not a new problem. If they needed us to tell them that their boring A-move unit is a boring A-move unit, then they've got more serious problems than the Warhound. Second, the fact that Blizzard recognizes a problem is only the beginning. Remember: the Warhound is in the game because Blizzard "recognized" that people want to be able to Mech in TvP. So they gave us a big Marauder. Thus missing the whole Goddamn point of Mech. Now personally, I dislike Mech play. I hated it in SC1, and I hate it now. But if Blizzard is going to encourage and endorse it, it can't just be "Factory units"; it needs to be its own individual style of play. And the This goes back to the whole "moving shot" fiasco, where people were asking for patrol/hold-position micro and got the Phoenix ability to move and shoot. Blizzard thought they were giving us what we wanted, but they didn't. So the fact that David Kim acknowledges a problem with a unit is not exactly filling me with confidence that it will be fixed well. I made a comment earlier in this thread - they're unfit to make the game. This is like having a grand vision and asking a monkey to make it happen. They can't even understand why we want what we want! We say we want more mech dynamics in the game (meaning putting heavy emphasis on positional play, decision making etc), and they give us more 'robots' ffs! | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On September 07 2012 10:37 SuPerFlyTNT wrote: I played around with energise to get quicker upgrades. Yeah that can work, but you sacrifice any ability to be aggressive and/or defend with purifier. Not an ideal situation, I think the spell slot could be used in a better way. At the moment energise is like supply drop at the OC - theoretically has some use but in practice you'll always be going for purifier/recall.A couple of things... Many of the spells or units you are calling bad, you are calling bad for reasons I can't even comprehend. Let me give you some examples: You say that the Mothership Core's energize is really something a player would only want to use on a Mothership. You noted that it would be useless on chronoboost because 'since when has chronoboost been gamebreaking?' First of all - what the fuck does chrono being 'gamebreaking' or not have to do with anything? Second of all, can you really not imagine a build that uses energize on Nexi to get more chronoboost out to hit a faster timing with an upgrade that you can get faster than the opponent might have thought you could, etc - just generally hitting any timing faster or coming up with a new timing that you coudln't do without so much chrono. You also tallk about 'lol who cares' for energizing a sentry. I imagine it wouldn't be common but you do realize, I hope, that sometimes Toss' lose games because they dont have enough forcefields. I'm not saying its the most important thing ever but you keep brushing aside things like they're a joke. Sounds like a situation where I'd rather have purifier  Another, and simpler, thing you said that is absurd is that giving Hydras speed does not 'increase their utility in any way.' Just quickly I can point out one way it does increase their utility - it increases their mobility......... How can you say that something moving faster doesn't give it more utility or help with any of their weaknesses? Casters are constantly saying 'Don't forget - when you engage with Hydra's, you can't run away because they're so slow.' Allow me to reiterate - 'because they're so slow.' You did go on to say that it only helps at hive (as a hive upgrade), at which point in the game Hydras are 'largely irrelevant.' I'd agree with you that in the current metagame Hydras are largely irrelevant during Hive tech. But in HotS, as I'm sure you know, Hydras can move faster. This introduces new utility in the form of *mobility* which might make them relevant in hive tech. Lastly about hydras - you talk about them still getting owned by Colossi. I totally agree its stupid the speed doesn't help them deal with their most significant counter from Protoss - similarly I find it annoying that the Mothership Core, when turned into a Mothership, will still be susceptible to Vikings. (You see I added the bit about the Mothership so that you would know I was being sarcastic about the Hydra/Colossus). Yup I stand by hydra speed being pointless, at least as far as PvZ is concerned. I'm not convinced that the upgrade is absolutely necessary to add into the game. Viper/Hydra together mitigate a lot of the problems hydras have and turn them into real danger units. Viper/Hydra wreck colossus so bad without careful engagements, its actually kinda cool because it makes the Colossus more micro intensive (and in a future blog I will be upgrading vipers from neutral to good for this reason). What made me feel it was necessary to respond, and why I hope at least a couple people bother to read this, is that alot of your original post is just theorycrafting ways in which new HotS stuff won't work, when you could just as easily be theorycrafting how the exact same units and spells WILL work - consider what I said on energizing Nexi to chronoboost more and hit a new or unexpected timing. With that in mind, your post becomes nothing but unproductive - inspiring other people who have [also] not thought about these things properly - much less tested them thoroughly - to take up your opinions. These were my impressions from playing the game after two days, sure its not a thorough test but its good enough for me to feel out what things are working and what things are not working. Since writing this, my opinion on Vipers has changed for the better, mines for the better (for their utility in TvZ), warhound/tempest stay exactly the same and if not, worse. The point is - you're an admin here. If you're going to make a post like this, put in some major disclaimers or at least imply that you THINK this isn't good for that reason, or that that isn't good for this reason, rather than stating it as though it were fact. Note the difference here: Your post is neither productive nor well thought out. -versus- I think your post is neither productive nor well thought out. Don't you think the second one is more appropriate? Thanks for the feedback I guess?On September 07 2012 10:55 idkfa wrote: Yup, I like them more now and would upgrade their status.Re: The Neutral The Viper - I like this unit a lot more now that I've had a chance to see it in action, and I don't think its interaction with Recall to be a reason to keep it below "the good." I am fine with blinding cloud not affecting protoss - that is energy that it can put to use pulling colossi or immortals over forcefield walls and into harm's way anyway. Re: The Bad I don't really think auto-mine is going to help anyone in bronze, they have far bigger problems and reasons why they lose games. Things like "training mode" which helps build units or something would be beneficial to bronze (and I guess make it more fun for them??) at the expense of most of the mechanics in SC2 and arguably to the dismay of the rest of the sc2 community. My point is, bronzies need much more automation than just auto-mine to have any real impact.Automine workers - three points of contention. First and second are simple "come on, really?" responses to your bulleted points, but the third has to do with helping Starcraft 2 grow. Having recently reread Gheed's amusing tales of the Bronze league, anything that makes the game more accessible to people without Starcraft backgrounds can only be a good thing. I'd put this right alongside the (toggle-able) newbified command card, where it explains right-clicking versus a-clicking, and say they're good ideas. Hydra Speed - Dimaga seemed to be getting some use out of that, in combination with Swarm Hosts, and I agree that putting it in Lair is unnecessary, but it seems like most of the lamentation regarding Hydras is that their role in the game has been usurped by Roaches, leaving them as niche/specialist units. I'm not a romantic, in that sense, so I'd put this among "the neutral." I'm open to changing my mind about it, but I still can't see a good reason why it is in the game - particularly when abduct + hydra is soooo strong right now. | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On September 06 2012 13:32 Plexa wrote: It isn't a free buff though? You have to research it and you can only research it once you get to hive tech. It just doesn't help with any problems that the hydra has since by hive tech hydras are largely irrelevant. Well I meant free in regards to having to trade it for another attribute of the hydra such as dps. Once you have hive the actual upgrade cost isn't even a big deal anyway. Sure hydras may not be used much now, but they might have some kind of use with the new HotS units. I don't think we can rule that at this point. | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
On September 08 2012 01:10 Grobyc wrote: Well I meant free in regards to having to trade it for another attribute of the hydra such as dps. Once you have hive the actual upgrade cost isn't even a big deal anyway. Sure hydras may not be used much now, but they might have some kind of use with the new HotS units. I don't think we can rule that at this point. Abduct is the primary thing that may enable it. (Although it remains to be seen.) | ||
|
Vindicarian
United States22 Posts
I agree with a lot of what you have said here. While some units are in need of some reevaluation or serious attention, a few others, such as the Swarm Host, are managing to create exactly the right kind of "feelings" or situations within a game. Personally, I am cautiously optimistic about the direction of HOTS. That having been said, I disagree with the Mothership Core being put in the "good" category. It is not that the unit isn't "creating the right feelings" or "isn't good enough" or anything of that sort. I love the idea of the Mothership Core and the role it serves, but I feel the unit will be forever limited and restricted from its true potential so long as it is tied down by the existence of and its relationship to its "counterpart", the Mothership itself. Nobody likes the Mothership, and Blizzard themselves have removed it before in prior HOTS builds, but I fear that the "success" of the Mothership Core (or the success of its concept) will encourage them to keep the unit and deter them from doing what ultimately needs to be done: removing the Mothership. It is a unit that not only by its very nature as a unique unit encourages deathball play, but serves little purpose other than filling a hole in later game Protoss play (a hole that Blizzard is already working on fixing with the Tempest (in theory), making it even more pointless). Personally I would love to see them turn the Mothership Core into a non-unique unit (finally ridding us of the Mothership, which simply does not belong in Starcraft) and experiment with Recall more. A "Defense Core", or some other appropriately titled non-unique Mothership Core would not only be infinitely easier to balance but could be a significantly more versatile and interesting unit as well. As far as Recall is concerned, exploring different models for the spell, such as making the spell cheaper but target a smaller area, does nothing but create further options with the unit. Even if an alternate Recall costed half of the current Mass Recall in energy and recalled half of the current Mass Recall area, a plethora of alternate gameplay options could be opened up (especially in a non-unique Mothership Core model) whilst keeping the original gameplay options the spell introduces in place. As it stands, Mass Recall on the Mothership Core provides exactly what Protoss needs come HOTS, but due to its expensive energy cost and therefore limited nature the spell only encourages a very particular type of use. I believe one of the units on your "bad" list, the Oracle, also has the potential to become something truly great. I've written a rather long and detailed analysis of the unit and its spells (past, present, and future) and propose some solutions therein towards molding it into a more fulfilling unit. I highly recommend reading it if the design of the Oracle is a point of concern for you. (http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=366714) | ||
| ||
