|
On July 10 2012 13:43 RogerChillingworth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 13:37 anApple wrote:On July 10 2012 13:31 Kull of Atlantis wrote:
From what I read their approach is
For Protoss :
-We want to give Protoss players the ability to not to fuck up and lose their early game army. So if they made the most stupid decision to headbump into bunkered ramps, they should be forgiven.
-These builds don't exist : 4 gate - 6 gate - 8 gate etc. So we want to give more chance to attack early game.
For Zerg :
-We don't think perfect tech switches, ability to macro hard, best production mechanic amongst 3 races, etc. are enough. So we wanted to make zerg overally the utopic race, which can be also in your face aggressive.
For Terran :
-Something about widow mine
-Something about widow mine
-If there will be problems we will remove widow mine. Sounds about right. Except they are adding a fat marauder too. "ability to macro hard", "best production mechanic". Empty, straw-man statements. P and T can also "macro hard" (rofl), and the "best production mechanic in the game" comes at a cost, and with considerable effort, and can disturbed more easily than the other races'. Not to mention zerg units are inherently worse, and with less range, etc. etc. etc. They need to have more and the ability to produce more at a time. It's starcraft 101. Come on man.
Are you serious? What effort? Injecting every so often? Thats hard? And you're using less range of what, zerglings? What about infestors super fungal range and broodlords ability to siege from super far away?
This is just ignorant
|
On July 10 2012 13:42 Digamma wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 13:32 yeastiality wrote:On July 10 2012 12:15 Chaggi wrote:
If widow mines are cut, what do Terrans have to look forward to? - warhounds - reaper upgrade - battlecruiser upgrade - other stuff they haven't shown yet - terran has more concepts/units/upgrades than the other races already, since their 'expansion' was first and the per race expansions are a really gross idea .............. sounds like the stupid "terran was imba first so zerg should be imba now" arguement except its "terran had more shit so it should have less now" as for the reaper, do you really believe life regeneration for a 50 life unit is gonna change the entire game and make people use it? they still explode if so much as touched and you lose 50 gas for it. battlecruiser upgrade is speed isnt it? thats only thing thats decent i guess.
The BC upgrade is just a 6-second speed boost for (I believe) 100 energy.
The list is basically grasping at straws.
|
On July 10 2012 13:46 LavaLava wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 13:15 The Final Boss wrote:
[*]If you want Terran to go Factory against Protoss maybe you should not have nerfed Thors... If you want Terran to go mech then you should not have nerfed it into oblivion after it was used in a single match in a single big tournament.
This, right here. They've literally stated that the main reason they nerfed Thors is that they didn't like the way Mass Thors LOOKS. I'm not making that up. Now, if they're not going to change the way the Thor looks, and yet it's ONE of THREE factory units, and the only one with AA, how the hell can they expect anyone to ever learn how to mech vs protoss in WoL? It would be like, mass marauder looks bad- we'll just make them way easier to kill. Okay, now go bio!
The Thor is just a dumb fucking unit. It's designed so poorly they can't make it really fit. They're either overpowered or useless.
|
On July 10 2012 13:49 fenrysk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 12:02 Ketara wrote:
You want a good argument for the Carrier?
Make it work like you want Tempest to work. Give the Interceptors an upgrade that sends them out at 22 range.
There. Carrier is what you want Tempest to be, but it's cool while the Tempest is dumb. amen. i thought also you could just give carriers the 22 range cannon and increase the interceptor deployment range to 10 or 11 or something instead of what it is now
Let Protoss micro it. There you go, carrier solved
|
Oh another thread with everyone defending their favorite race.
Lets wait for the beta, we'll complain there with real first hand experience.
|
On July 10 2012 12:32 Lineridarz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 12:29 zhurai wrote:On July 10 2012 12:19 Lineridarz wrote:On July 10 2012 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:- Protoss has to very passive in the early game as they only have zealot, sentry's and stalkers at that point. ????????????????????????????? zealots, sentries and stalkers suck against bio, i dont understand the ??????????????????????????????? because zealot stalker does pretty well in the early game if the terran wants to go into the macro game (i.e. 1rax fe) or rather... without marauders or upgrades (stim/cs) in the early game. - If the beta comes out and the widow mine is still having issues, it will be most likely cut from the final game. cutting things is always retarded. including cutting your wrist. - The mothership core will allow protoss to pressure in the early game, without the risk of losing their high gas cost sentries. without _any risk_ is stupid there should be some sort of risk for things you do Do you even play this game? Against 2 bunkers the terran can never die against a 4 gate / 3 gate with repair...
Hmm... Do YOU even play this game? Look at sase's builds in PvT. He does a 1 gate into expand + 2 gates pressure. It's far from being all-in (since you have a really early nexus) and at the ~7 minutes mark he has the most cost effective composition he can have. So unless the Terran has 3 or 4 bunkers (even with 3 it might be hard to hold off) the Protoss player is almost always in a good position afterwards.
There is really a flaw in the way Blizzard is balancing things. What made BW a great game was tightly made builds, and players are just starting to do that in SC2, but if Blizzard continues heavily monitoring things this way, we may never see what strategy geniuses could have come with. It's ok to add/remove units in new expansions (that's the whole point of it actually), but do it for the good reasons. And yes, there should be risks to poking around with sentries, and they aren't too heavy at the moment. Sentries have forcefields, a great tool to get out of many bad situations.
|
Turning an advantage a clever zerg can make in midgames into wins, very good. More cascading advantages like is seen in a way with the mass 11min roach vs toss third approach back in a Stephano era. Eco lead zoom crashing waves of roaches pelting the shore.
Stargate consideration, Yes! Raiding options/tweaks, yes! I don't think Protoss needs the power that a stim drop/doubledrop packs, but something in between a prism full of zealots with a warpin and one with full energy templars.
Terran changes totally depend on their implementation. I will be awaiting to hear how they'll make the factory a standard route against Protoss instead of being confined to the fringes. (Maru still builds siege tanks, but top gamers factory units are rarely seen.
Zerg attack Nydus Worms would entirely depend on implementation. Is it attacking like a hydra dps against units? Or will it get a powerful anti-structure attack? Is it low cost, cheap nuisance or higher cost force-to-be-reckoned with? Creep nydus worms ... unless they make the spew range ridiculous, I don't see them coming into play.
|
On July 10 2012 13:53 rezoacken wrote:
Oh another thread with everyone defending their favorite race.
Lets wait for the beta, we'll complain there with real first hand experience.
The last time we waited without testing something extensively, The queen range was put in and made every Terran cry tears of blood.
|
On July 10 2012 13:52 Brett wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 13:46 LavaLava wrote:On July 10 2012 13:15 The Final Boss wrote:
[*]If you want Terran to go Factory against Protoss maybe you should not have nerfed Thors... If you want Terran to go mech then you should not have nerfed it into oblivion after it was used in a single match in a single big tournament.
This, right here. They've literally stated that the main reason they nerfed Thors is that they didn't like the way Mass Thors LOOKS. I'm not making that up. Now, if they're not going to change the way the Thor looks, and yet it's ONE of THREE factory units, and the only one with AA, how the hell can they expect anyone to ever learn how to mech vs protoss in WoL? It would be like, mass marauder looks bad- we'll just make them way easier to kill. Okay, now go bio! The Thor is just a dumb fucking unit. It's designed so poorly they can't make it really fit. They're either overpowered or useless.
The only time the Thor was considered "overpowered" was following the series between ThorZaIN and MC in TSL3. Other than ThorZaIN's usage of Thors in TvP, I don't think it was used at all in a major tournament before it got nerfed. If you don't give a strategy like that to Korea and let them try to figure out how to beat it, how can you really say for a fact that it is OP? Look at Mutalisks. For a long time ZvP was dominated by them, but eventually Koreans started to figure ZvP out and there was no real balance change (lol Phoenix upgrade). So if Korea can do that to the Mutalisk and change the metagame (and frankly the Mutalisk had more results that proved it's "imbalance" or "OP-ness"), who says the Thor could not have found a place in the metagame too.
But if you want to talk about things that are designed so poorly that they can never really fit, I would love to talk about that:
Warp Gates - either the units are too good or they're too poop. Because they build instantly and anywhere, you have to make units less strong, but in doing so, after the units are actually made with the Warp Gate, those units are distinctly worse.
Void Rays - if the maps can abuse Void Ray openings, then they will dominate (Kulas, Blistering Sands, even Metalopolis), but right now they are basically never used because the maps do not have rocks in the right places/other ways to abuse early Voids. They also are a weird unit because they're high tech, but work best in small numbers where they can get charged. Talk about a stupid snow-bally unit.
Good thing that Blizzard has addressed how they plan on fixing those in HotS...
Oh wait, nevermind, Blizzard is giving Protoss a 22 Range Flying monstrosity. You want to talk about a terrible unit design, well there you have it!
|
On July 10 2012 13:53 rezoacken wrote:
Oh another thread with everyone defending their favorite race.
Lets wait for the beta, we'll complain there with real first hand experience.
lol patch 1.4.3.
enough said
Zerg can now start with a 3base economy by the 4:20 mark and Hive comes at 15:00, AND they get one of the most dangerous (and relatively easily made) late-game compositions
The Tempest just sounds like a really stupid unit. From the VoDs, it appears to be this giant super-cannon that's slow as hell and has really slow firing rate, and it's not even splash. If you have like 5 or 6 of them I suppose it could be useful but other than that it just seems like a total waste of money. If they would allow the Carrier to be microable (like BW..) it would be pretty freaking awesome
|
On July 10 2012 11:56 KonohaFlash wrote:Carrier
- A lot of people still want it in the game, but he hasn't seen anyone come up with a good arguement for it, besides it being cool and iconic.
It's a unit which builds units!?!?! That's unique!
Oh well guys, you heard it from the man's mouth himself, Blizzard designers aren't able to creatively think outside the box. Ugh, my brain.
The whole "we should keep the carrier" thread has tens of good ideas, but they're buried in the debate that Browder himself seems to only be able to see. If it was just "It's Iconic" vs "It's a bad unit" then I'd be on the "its a bad unit" side. But I mean, come on look at it as a flying floating mini-stargate and wham! That's one hell of an exciting unit.
But hey, guess it's hard to a-move and doesn't work well in it's current form. Better not use it.
|
terran= even more fucked.
They might actually take out the widow mine, leave us with wana be goliaths and battle hellions. I'm giving blizzard a high five for not even taking a look at t's late game. yeah!
|
On July 10 2012 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +- Protoss has to very passive in the early game as they only have zealot, sentry's and stalkers at that point. ?????????????????????????????
Agreed.
I really get the impression that blizzard doesn't play their own games.
Also,
"I don’t know what the ladder rotation will look like. We’ve seen the tendency of a general growth in size as the games are getting more macro oriented. When we look back in the beta I remember having stuff like Steppes of War and our biggest map being Desert Oasis at this point. And now I’m seeing maps where protoss is taking an early third and I’m like “What is going on?” *laughs* “This is a very different game than the one we launched two years ago.” Now we see terrans and protosses early expanding which is much different to the beta. This is evolution and the evolution will continue: I don’t know to where as a lot of this is dictated by the maps the community like to play, the kinds of things happening during the games"
Based on the last ladder map added to the pool (the biggest map yet by any standard), they still seem to be incompetent at making maps. Early expanding? in starcraft? Never!! (Trollface) As if people didn't early expo in BW.... Watch them introduce 20 new maps that are all stupidly gigantic for hots, and yet the community has come up with so much better stuff that will never see the light of day.
And they still haven't finalized the units and the expansion is supposed to come out in a few months. I don't mean to be alarmist but I am fearful for this expansion... Blizzards last 3 games have been cataclysm, SC2 and D3, in my book they are 1 for 3 out of those. Lets see if they can get their average up to .500 or if they will be sent back down to the minor leagues for practice.
|
The thing that seems to bother me with the way they want to balance Zerg is that they can make kill moves at almost every point in the game where as Terran and Protoss don't have that luxury. Three hatch builds already set them up for an earlier end game...... a midgame kill move off of 3 hatches when Zerg already has a super advantage just seems completely absurd.
|
Protoss lacks the ability to raid, outside of the warp-prism and blink stalkers, however these only work effectively on the pro-level.
Really? Do they forget that even though it takes precious APM of a lower level player to use WP or harass with Blink Stalkers, it also takes precious APM of the equally low skilled opponent to defend?
Also widow mine might be cut? Shit lol... if there's no replacement, that would suck. (Or I mean, if there's nothing to fill its role)
TvT is NOT stale. Sure one player may transition into air battles. Is this wrong? Remember if it's Bio vs Mech, and Bio transitions into air, then no problem! Mech just transitions to air as well, right? Well then what happens? The Air player transitions back into bio, and mech player responds with mech. It just goes back and forth, I don't see how that's quite stale. I like how TvT has so many "phases".
|
|
|
Seem like people really don't understand what Browder said. When he said that TvT is stale when it's seigeline vs siegeline I'm pretty sure he means mech vs mech which is somewhat true. Siegetank vs Siegetank alone is boring. That's why we enjoy bio vs mech or marine tank vs marine tank. Everything in HotS looks quite good imo except for the oracle which is stupid.
|
On July 10 2012 14:16 Wildmoon wrote:
Seem like people really don't understand what Browder said. When he said that TvT is stale when it's seigeline vs siegeline I'm pretty sure he means mech vs mech which is somewhat true. Siegetank vs Siegetank alone is boring. That's why we enjoy bio vs mech or marine tank vs marine tank.
When was the last time you saw a mech vs mech TvT? Those types of games always become pure air battles anyways.
|
Argument against the Carrier is so stupid. They have given so much attention to other units. The Carrier can be fixed, they just don't try.
|
On July 10 2012 14:18 Whatson wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 14:16 Wildmoon wrote:
Seem like people really don't understand what Browder said. When he said that TvT is stale when it's seigeline vs siegeline I'm pretty sure he means mech vs mech which is somewhat true. Siegetank vs Siegetank alone is boring. That's why we enjoy bio vs mech or marine tank vs marine tank. When was the last time you saw a mech vs mech TvT? Those types of games always become pure air battles anyways.
With Warhound you may be able to be more agressive in Mech vs Mech. I know that people fear that few Warhound will be able to just destroy siegeline and mech won't be viable in TvT but I don't think it will happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
