EPTLotV Balance Update Now Live (April 15) - Page 17
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
xxjcdentonxx
Canada163 Posts
| ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On April 18 2015 20:31 PostNationalism wrote: exactly. i hate that the teamliquid forum is apparently so biased towards slow and boring macro games that take 20 minutes to wind up. why is their so much opposition to more starting workers??????? does nobody watch streams? the first 5-10 minutes of every single game are boring as fuck..... im sure the players get bored too... In Brood War we had a term for this. It's called playing SimCity, because all you do is build your town and never fight. And there were also the noobs who would call for "nr20" at the beginning of every game. By the end of WoL, that's what SC2 became. Well, 5 years later we've relearned that spending the first 15 minutes of every game building the same things in the same exact order with no action every single time isn't that fun to play or watch. I don't know if it was because of all the new players who didn't already learn this in Brood War, or because people feel embarrassed when they lose in the first 10 minutes because their opponent didn't give them time to lovingly craft their master plan unstoppable deathball army with 24 carriers and 3 arbiters. Low resources is definitely one way to force action, maybe it's better than having wide open seconds and thirds like in Xel'Naga Caverns. I think it's going to make the game harder all-around but especially for new players. Having to take and defend lots of bases is very APM-heavy. Sadly it seems to be the only way though, because protoss is incapable of surviving in this game without turtling. | ||
|
HallofPain4444
Japan71 Posts
My idea would make the Adept unit look like HP/Shield 10/50 Cost 100/25 Armor 0 Range 4(+3 with upgrade) Damage 20+5 vs light(so that they 2shot marines) Attack speed 1 Speed same as reaper | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On April 19 2015 00:57 HallofPain4444 wrote: Is it just me or I think that the new Adepts are still worthless like crap. Maybe it should fit in the glass canon DPS role instead of the tank role? Right now the small size(it has alot of HP+shield but don't exactly TANK) and low DPS as well as low range of this unit means the opponent can igonore it and target something else(that possess greater threat). I don't see why they felt protoss needed ANOTHER harass unit. They introduced the oracle for exactly this reason, when protoss already had phoenix and blink stalker. If anything, protoss has nothing that can deal with roaches and marauders until immortals are on the field. I don't like being forced into robo builds every game. I guess you could also count void rays as a hard counter to armored ground, but that seems pretty risky when marines and hydralisks exist. | ||
|
ohmylanta1003
United States128 Posts
On April 19 2015 02:37 BaronVonOwn wrote: I don't see why they felt protoss needed ANOTHER harass unit. They introduced the oracle for exactly this reason, when protoss already had phoenix and blink stalker. If anything, protoss has nothing that can deal with roaches and marauders until immortals are on the field. I don't like being forced into robo builds every game. I guess you could also count void rays as a hard counter to armored ground, but that seems pretty risky when marines and hydralisks exist. I would say void rays still do quite well against hydras. | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On April 19 2015 03:05 ohmylanta1003 wrote: I would say void rays still do quite well against hydras. what? On April 18 2015 10:27 ohmylanta1003 wrote: Every time there is a thread even remotely related to Starcraft, it's littered with people complaining about the current state of the game, theorycrafting through there silver league games (not saying I'm good, just saying most people don't have the skill necessary to properly complain), and shouting blasphemies at Blizzard, the worst fucking company in the whole world (or at least that's what I'm led to believe by everyone here). I'm sick of such a beautiful game being surrounded by such an awful community and I know I'm not the only one. It literally pushes people away from the game, which is the last thing we need. you would be right with that, but even good players complain about the same design issues the community is moaning about for 5 years. I am sorry if a game is boring to watch AND frustrating to play it is ill suited to be a lasting E-sports title. Sc2 isnt bad for a strategy game, (even though it pales compared to its predecessor and Warcraft 3) but it could be so much better, if Blizzard would be willing to use formulas that have proven to work instead of reeinventing the wheel completely. | ||
|
dust7
199 Posts
On April 18 2015 22:21 Tresher wrote: Don´t know the release but DK said it will be a fast air to air fighter with small damage as attack with splash. It can transform into a stationary air unit that attacks ground with 9 range. They want to implement it mostly for Mutas. Hope they change the Thor then. Im pumped for this unit. And people should calm down. Its a beta , it should be clear that they test things out. Im sure most of the people here have not even beta access and judge the game just by watching it. Can somebody explain to me why in this game everything has to have either extreme speed or range? | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On April 19 2015 05:36 dust7 wrote: Can somebody explain to me why in this game everything has to have either extreme speed or range? because every unit has to be extreme in this game or it doesnt fit in. | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
The adept mechanic is just dumb. I don't know why some people think its cool. No it's not. It's dumb gimmick and doesn't work against most early game units - zerglings, marines, stalkers. Just remove the unit and bring us another... This time actually useful. The disruptor needs to go too. It's basicaly the condemn ability from Diablo 3. Even the animation is similar. The unit is not good, not fun , not a good replacment for the colossus. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On April 18 2015 13:12 BronzeKnee wrote: Everything everyone writes can be interpreted by people however they want to interpret it, that is free will. My definition of reward and punishment was based purely on behavioral psychology (though it is referred to a reinforcement, not reward, in psychology). ![[image loading]](http://s12.postimg.org/wd13o9scd/1024px_Operant_conditioning_diagram.png) If you could just take a moment out from being smarter than everyone and pay attention: First of all, you jump into a discussion about how the game - the economic system of the game - punishes or rewards players and start talking about how you as the other player would punish my actions. Fine, I let that go because you were raising a perfectly valid point: it's even more imprecise to delineate punishment and reward across two different games when there's another agent involved whose actions may well be obliged to be different in those two games. In point of fact, proxies and (iirc) cannon rushes have already proved less effective in LotV's economy, making it harder to punish that early expand. Secondly, you start lecturing me about behavioural psychology. If, as you say, we're all too stupid to understand these things properly, I'm even more right that these terms are a poor choice for communicating a concept to the intended audience. Thirdly, that diagram? The bit at the top? That's the baseline. The status-quo from which punishment and reward deviate. And as I already said a couple of times, provided everyone intuits what the status quo is intended to be, talking about punishment and reward is fine. But they haven't. Read the thread and see. So, one more time: In HotS, you are punished for staying on one base because eventually your mineral income will drop to zero. In LotV, you are punished for staying on one base because eventually your mineral income will halve, and later drop to zero. In HotS you are rewarded with superior (note: relative) income if you secure an expansion before your opponent. That's all that matters. Not that you have more, but that you have more than him. In LotV you are rewarded even more if you secure an expansion before your opponent. You don't like that last line, because the 'reward' is supremacy, something measured relative to your opponent, rather than purely in terms of your own income. Yet you were perfectly happy to dive in with both feet and talk about how your one-base proxy would 'punish' me. and to compare relative incomes across two games. So this isn't really left up to interpretation for anyone who submits themselves to science, there is no relativity in these definitions. Do you need a fork to eat those words, or can you manage with your fingers? But that is enough of this semantics argument for me. Take the last word on it. Thanks, I will. Works out better for everyone that way. | ||
|
ohmylanta1003
United States128 Posts
On April 19 2015 05:31 404AlphaSquad wrote: what? you would be right with that, but even good players complain about the same design issues the community is moaning about for 5 years. I am sorry if a game is boring to watch AND frustrating to play it is ill suited to be a lasting E-sports title. Sc2 isnt bad for a strategy game, (even though it pales compared to its predecessor and Warcraft 3) but it could be so much better, if Blizzard would be willing to use formulas that have proven to work instead of reeinventing the wheel completely. Hmm. Yeah. Sorry about that one. I was wrong. You're right, hydras would win in a straight up fight, but you would need almost a pure hydra comp to compete with mass void rays, which is also risky, as hydras are easily killed by AOE attacks, which Protoss has plenty of. | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 20 2015 00:17 royalroadweed wrote: I wish they would have fixed the minimap with this patch. Looking at it feels like I don't have my glasses on. You mean the weaker colors? | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
Yep. | ||
|
HallofPain4444
Japan71 Posts
| ||
|
dust7
199 Posts
On April 18 2015 23:54 BaronVonOwn wrote: In Brood War we had a term for this. It's called playing SimCity, because all you do is build your town and never fight. And there were also the noobs who would call for "nr20" at the beginning of every game. The term Sim City was almost exclusively used for strategic building placement in Broodwar, e.g. a Zerg putting his evo chambers in a way that makes his sunken colonies harder to reach for melee units. Turtling was just called turtling. | ||
|
SoleSteeler
Canada5446 Posts
| ||
|
boxerfred
Germany8360 Posts
| ||
|
Topin
Peru10082 Posts
On April 20 2015 05:44 SoleSteeler wrote: Anyone seen lurkers being used vs. Terran bio? I see lurkers a lot in ZvP and in ZvZ if it goes past early game. Any games (vods?) out there with lurkers vs. bio? in my mediocre experience they look strong, by the time you get into range to attack them you have lost a lot of units/hp and they feel really tanky. also, marauders dont do shit to ultras now T_T bio doesnt look too good right now as far i can tell | ||
| ||
