EPT1. on new battle.net
2. Colour glitch fix
Thats it
SC1 is getting patched soon!! - Page 7
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Shock710
Australia6097 Posts
1. on new battle.net 2. Colour glitch fix Thats it | ||
|
radley
Poland582 Posts
| ||
|
Shock710
Australia6097 Posts
On January 22 2017 20:25 radley wrote: But you are aware of that color glitch has been fixed years ago by using proper launcher with plugin, right? yeah i have used it, also there was trick with my bw on xp which i alt-tabbed quick enough it would fix it as well hahaah, but yeah i know plugins can fix it, although assuming it would launch out of battle.net 2.0 then they blizzard would need to actively fix it on their side. | ||
|
yuben
5 Posts
| ||
|
zaMNal
Mongolia385 Posts
SCV hp of 60 was one of the bigger baffles for me personally for the longest time. It takes whole 7 mutalisks to 1-shot an scv but probe and drone need just 5 mutalisks. This difference is huge, pretty unfair. Some say it's because SCV doesn't have regeneration like probes or drones. BUT it has direct manual healing(repair) available at any time, which is at least as good as regen, and is especially superb when doing bunker/scv rushes. Bringing scv to 40 hp would make it very fair, especially as it can be repaired to 100% in few seconds. Or 45 hp max (still 5 mutalisk to 1-shot it). 60 is just waay over the top as long as they can be repaired. | ||
|
Terrorbladder
2719 Posts
On January 22 2017 22:12 zaMNal wrote: I would normally make a reply about why there's nothing wrong with SCVs but I can't, since I lost brain cells reading thisFrom other thread Talking about TvZ issues: SCV hp of 60 was one of the bigger baffles for me personally for the longest time. It takes whole 7 mutalisks to 1-shot an scv but probe and drone need just 5 mutalisks. This difference is huge, pretty unfair. Some say it's because SCV doesn't have regeneration like probes or drones. BUT it has direct manual healing(repair) available at any time, which is at least as good as regen, and is especially superb when doing bunker/scv rushes. Bringing scv to 40 hp would make it very fair, especially as it can be repaired to 100% in few seconds. Or 45 hp max (still 5 mutalisk to 1-shot it). 60 is just waay over the top as long as they can be repaired. | ||
|
GeckoXp
Germany2016 Posts
| ||
|
HornyHerring
Papua New Guinea1059 Posts
I'm pretty sure it's the compatibility patch, they wont rebalance it. | ||
|
quirinus
Croatia2489 Posts
On January 22 2017 03:23 DarkNetHunter wrote: This will just put it at lan latency levels that we're used to since MoC made the latencychanger plugin a decade ago. no, I mean disregarding latency. ranged units that are running away and being charged on will now turn faster to attack back once you give the order. this effectively increases ranged unit effectivness vs melee units (and other ranged units depending on the situation). | ||
|
yuben
5 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On January 22 2017 22:12 zaMNal wrote: From other thread Talking about TvZ issues: SCV hp of 60 was one of the bigger baffles for me personally for the longest time. It takes whole 7 mutalisks to 1-shot an scv but probe and drone need just 5 mutalisks. This difference is huge, pretty unfair. Some say it's because SCV doesn't have regeneration like probes or drones. BUT it has direct manual healing(repair) available at any time, which is at least as good as regen, and is especially superb when doing bunker/scv rushes. Bringing scv to 40 hp would make it very fair, especially as it can be repaired to 100% in few seconds. Or 45 hp max (still 5 mutalisk to 1-shot it). 60 is just waay over the top as long as they can be repaired. Look, if you want to talk about balance, then you NEED to bring in EVERYTHING. Thats called logic. Without logic your post loses value. What you didnt bring up here is that scvs when building structures NEED TO STAY AT THAT BUILDING TILL ITS FINISHED. This means two things. 1) SCVS more vulnerable to attacks. 2. THE scv CANT MINE MINERALS for the duration of the walk movement+structure building. All of a sudden, it doesnt look UNFAIR anymore. So please, MORE LOGIC less emotions. | ||
|
yuben
5 Posts
This is a compatibility patch... | ||
|
KameZerg
Sweden1767 Posts
On January 22 2017 22:36 GeckoXp wrote: Anyone who writes SC1 instead of BW should be repeatedly punched in the face. i prefer sc or starcraft, i didnt even know what BW meant when i first heard it | ||
|
xboi209
United States1173 Posts
On January 25 2017 06:59 ICanFlyLow wrote: i prefer sc or starcraft, i didnt even know what BW meant when i first heard it Unfortunately, "SC" or "Starcraft" refers to StarCraft 2 by default nowadays. | ||
|
outscar
2832 Posts
| ||
|
[[Starlight]]
United States1578 Posts
On January 25 2017 07:16 xboi209 wrote: Unfortunately, "SC" or "Starcraft" refers to StarCraft 2 by default nowadays. With the SC2 scene starting to go downhill (pro teams disbanding, etc.) while BW is reviving, that's a lot less true than it was say five years ago. And certainly in Korea, BW never stopped being the default Starcraft. To me (and I suspect many others), Starcraft 2 = Starcraft 2 or SC2, that's it, no other umbrella names for it really... and of course there are the major release references (WoL, HotS, LotV). BroodWar = BroodWar, BW, or Starcraft. 'Starcraft 1' just sounds odd, and it's actually kind of annoying when certain casters like Tastosis use the term repeatedly, for whatever reason. Original SC, without the BW expansion = Vanilla SC or Vanilla Starcraft. Which almost no one plays, so the terminology there isn't really a big deal. | ||
|
[[Starlight]]
United States1578 Posts
On January 25 2017 06:04 yuben wrote: Remember when we used to laugh at SC2 players for making outrageous balance suggestions? This is a compatibility patch... I think most ppl know there aren't going to be direct balance changes, it's just fun to talk about balance. | ||
|
quirinus
Croatia2489 Posts
On January 25 2017 05:05 yuben wrote: Turn rate is latency. What? If they reduced the latecly they'd say so, this is the unit turning speed, instead, I'm fairly sure. | ||
mustaju
Estonia4504 Posts
| ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
On January 25 2017 08:29 mustaju wrote: I don't see controversy in balance patches. If it turns out awful, people can play the earlier version with a rich legacy. If it turns out great, there could be an influx of interested players. Using two different versions of games usually ends up with a split fanbase that hate the other side. It's like CS 1.6 and Source. Starcraft might be a bit different since it's such an old game that's almost entirely community-driven but you never know. Also, I don't see what's wrong with saying Starcraft 1. Especally when talking to a larger audience, the brand Starcraft is a lot more recognized than Brood War I think. And no one plays vanilla SC1 so I don't see who would get confused by it. | ||
| ||
