|
The following is a post I made earlier today. I thought it should at least make it to my blog.
From what I've seen, a lot of the hype around the Watchtower is flawed (concerning Battle Report commentary). That could be partly because of the positions they occupy in the current map pools shown off. I suspect these towers would be more viable if placed closer to starting locations or higher valued expansions.
By using a Tower a player should be able to see from across a river or temple wall, whether or not a player has moved his forces/resource hubs into a more strategical route. The problem is that there is a subtle linearity to gameplay which prohibits free game flow in result of the incorrectly positioned Watchtowers.
Right now, it looks like the 1v1 maps are too small to support a high count of Watchtowers. It seems like for them to be effective, that at least 3 to 4 of them is needed to not only avoid linear gameplay models but to avoid Blizzard maps from failing in their own philosophy.
As far as Zerg goes, I'm very surprised in how ineffective the Baneling has become without being able to roll. The old movement animation made it a faster and dangerous unit. Not only that, but it presented a larger risk and fun factor for both the enemy and the controlling player. If the Baneling is to survive beta, it's speed should be upgradeable (to allow it to roll) or its durability should be upgradeable against lightly armed (not armored) units. Perhaps units that deal damage under a certain threshold would be effected under an upgrade suggestion such as this.
The Mutalisk also needs to be more limber. Not only should it be a viable assault unit (like in BW) but it also should be a viable, defensible, standalone unit to make up for the loss of Scourge..........
And as far as critiquing goes, I was also not very fond of the Reaper's speed. In no shape or form, even with its leaping ability, can it be micro'd to fend off enemies by themselves. As it is, getting past enemy lines to disrupt mining operation(s) does not seem viable at any efficient rate. Just as quickly they arrive to harass peons, are they completely taken care of. A simple tweak in speed will suffice for this unit to last beta testing.
 
|
On July 13 2009 21:48 NastyMarine wrote:
The following is a post I made earlier today. I thought it should at least make it to my blog.
From what I've seen, a lot of the hype around the Watchtower is flawed (concerning Battle Report commentary). That could be partly because of the positions they occupy in the current map pools shown off. I suspect these towers would be more viable if placed closer to starting locations or higher valued expansions.
By using a Tower a player should be able to see from across a river or temple wall, whether or not a player has moved his forces/resource hubs into a more strategical route. The problem is that there is a subtle linearity to gameplay which prohibits free game flow in result of the incorrectly positioned Watchtowers.
Right now, it looks like the 1v1 maps are too small to support a high count of Watchtowers. It seems like for them to be effective, that at least 3 to 4 of them is needed to not only avoid linear gameplay models but to avoid Blizzard maps from failing in their own philosophy.
As far as Zerg goes, I'm very surprised in how ineffective the Baneling has become without being able to roll. The old movement animation made it a faster and dangerous unit. Not only that, but it presented a larger risk and fun factor for both the enemy and the controlling player. If the Baneling is to survive beta, it's speed should be upgradeable (to allow it to roll) or its durability should be upgradeable against lightly armed (not armored) units. Perhaps units that deal damage under a certain threshold would be effected under an upgrade suggestion such as this.
The Mutalisk also needs to be more limber. Not only should it be a viable assault unit (like in BW) but it also should be a viable, defensible, standalone unit to make up for the loss of Scourge..........
And as far as critiquing goes, I was also not very fond of the Reaper's speed. In no shape or form, even with its leaping ability, can it be micro'd to fend off enemies by themselves. As it is, getting past enemy lines to disrupt mining operation(s) does not seem viable at any efficient rate. Just as quickly they arrive to harass peons, are they completely taken care of. A simple tweak in speed will suffice for this unit to last beta testing.
Baneling all ready has a speed upgrade that changes the animation to rolling.
Zergs AtA is the Corruptor. This is a problem for a lot of people trying to compare SC1 to SC2. SC2 is a whole new game. What you need to compare is generic concepts (AtA, GtA, etc.). The Muta is all ready a very powerful unit in SC2 especially when you have unlimited selection there is no need to make it a defensive and offensive unit at the same time (OP anyone?).
I think the concept around the Reaper is similar to the Reaver and Collosus. High damage, low durability. From what I've read from people who've played SC2 is that the reaper is by far and away the best harasser in the game.
Also, the map sizes are the same as in SC1, but you can't compare visually from 3D to 2D. 3D looks smaller, however it is actually the same size you are just seeing more space than you would in 2D.
|
10387 Posts
looks like you aren't totally up to the current standing with the SC2 Baneling as of now, they are very effective from what we have seen, burrow+baneling makes a very deadly and effective combination. Also, from what I last heard, Banelings can explode while they are still burrowed (which imo sounds rather imba O_O). And like Aegraen said, they have a speed upgrade
|
Zurich15357 Posts
Banelings have speed upgrade.
Mutas don't need to be buffed, still Scourge or something to take out drops needs to get back into the game. Corruptors do not replace them.
Reaper are excellent harassers and if microed are almost impossible to kill pre Hydra/Muta.
Map sizes are similar to BW.
|
On July 13 2009 22:21 ArvickHero wrote:
Also, from what I last heard, Banelings can explode while they are still burrowed (which imo sounds rather imba O_O). And like Aegraen said, they have a speed upgrade
Spider mines for zerg? Sweet
|
On July 13 2009 23:21 zatic wrote:
Banelings have speed upgrade.
Mutas don't need to be buffed, still Scourge or something to take out drops needs to get back into the game. Corruptors do not replace them.
Reaper are excellent harassers and if microed are almost impossible to kill pre Hydra/Muta.
Map sizes are similar to BW.
Why is it Zerg is the only race that needs an instagib unit to deal with drops? Corruptors do just fine, and from all reports is the best AtA unit in the game.
|
MrHoon
10183 Posts
On July 14 2009 00:00 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2009 23:21 zatic wrote:
Banelings have speed upgrade.
Mutas don't need to be buffed, still Scourge or something to take out drops needs to get back into the game. Corruptors do not replace them.
Reaper are excellent harassers and if microed are almost impossible to kill pre Hydra/Muta.
Map sizes are similar to BW.
Why is it Zerg is the only race that needs an instagib unit to deal with drops? Corruptors do just fine, and from all reports is the best AtA unit in the game.
Scouts do awesome AtA damage, but is massing scouts the best way to go?
|
On July 14 2009 00:35 MrHoon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2009 00:00 Aegraen wrote:On July 13 2009 23:21 zatic wrote:
Banelings have speed upgrade.
Mutas don't need to be buffed, still Scourge or something to take out drops needs to get back into the game. Corruptors do not replace them.
Reaper are excellent harassers and if microed are almost impossible to kill pre Hydra/Muta.
Map sizes are similar to BW.
Why is it Zerg is the only race that needs an instagib unit to deal with drops? Corruptors do just fine, and from all reports is the best AtA unit in the game. Scouts do awesome AtA damage, but is massing scouts the best way to go?
Is it your position then, that Zerg cannot handle drops without an instagib unit? You would think this would have shown up somewhere along the line of SC2 development no?
This is SC2 remember, not SC1.
|
MrHoon
10183 Posts
On July 14 2009 00:43 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2009 00:35 MrHoon wrote:On July 14 2009 00:00 Aegraen wrote:On July 13 2009 23:21 zatic wrote:
Banelings have speed upgrade.
Mutas don't need to be buffed, still Scourge or something to take out drops needs to get back into the game. Corruptors do not replace them.
Reaper are excellent harassers and if microed are almost impossible to kill pre Hydra/Muta.
Map sizes are similar to BW.
Why is it Zerg is the only race that needs an instagib unit to deal with drops? Corruptors do just fine, and from all reports is the best AtA unit in the game. Scouts do awesome AtA damage, but is massing scouts the best way to go? Is it your position then, that Zerg cannot handle drops without an instagib unit? You would think this would have shown up somewhere along the line of SC2 development no? This is SC2 remember, not SC1.
Ofcourse I know this is SC2, but people who visited blizzard already have stated the amount of mobility Late Game Terran has is just ridiculous. The only way to fight a terran army late game is to flank them extremely well. Great Flanking has always been the bread and butter of Zergs but when Medivacs and Ravens fly around at their will then yes, it is a problem.
|
when I read "watchtower" I instantly thought of those books that the Jehovah Witness/Mormons carry around
|
If zerg need another anti-air unit, no problem.
But ppl just asking scourge, scourge, scourge, is more like a whine. Zerg already has too much units from SC1, plus Scourge and its meh.
Ask for a different counter, i dont know.
Banelings jump, Hydras throwing banelings, dont know. Anything but another SC1 unit.
|
On July 14 2009 03:30 danieldrsa wrote:
If zerg need another anti-air unit, no problem.
But ppl just asking scourge, scourge, scourge, is more like a whine. Zerg already has too much units from SC1, plus Scourge and its meh.
Ask for a different counter, i dont know.
Banelings jump, Hydras throwing banelings, dont know. Anything but another SC1 unit.
No! Hydras throwing ultras! They can already borrow so why not ^^
|
My comment about map size has nothing to do with '128X128' or '96X96' - especially in relation to 3D and 2D. I was stating that Xel 'Naga Watchtowers seem like they'd be more effective with better positioning (in relation to tactical points) or by possibly adding 1 or 2 more towers. A Watchtower that overlooks a focal battlefield is perfectly sound, but it could be used to a better extent in my opinion.
As far as my reference towards the Scourge/Mutalisk, I have to say that I'm not looking at the unit, I'm looking at its role in comparison to strategy shifts while in-game. For example, after upgrading and other expenditures, going from queen to baneling to roach seems like a full dive into a 'one dimensional' route as far as resource management goes. There should be a higher tier unit, such as the Mutalisk to make up for it. Making it a limber unit could help strategic transitioning.
|
I didnt know that the roll animation for the baneling was already upgradeable. That makes it a lot better.
|
Did you guys take note on how ineffective the Baneling was once the Marauder hit the scene in BR 3? The Roach barely kept the Zerg Player's army afloat at that point. Maybe I'm just being cynical or maybe the Zerg should have sped up his Tier teching. Either way, the Terran player was able to handle the Zerg without having to spend much of his money on tech tree transitioning.
|
* 1on1: Blistering Sands 176x152, Mar Sara Wasteland map set
* 1on1: Kulas Ravine, 192x192, Bel'Shir Jungle map set
* 2on2: Lost Temple 160x160, Bel'Shir Jungle map set
* 2on2: New Antioch 176x184, Shakuras Wasteland map set
???
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
