EPT[D] Warhound: Is it good or should it be changed? - Page 12
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
| ||
|
baba1
Canada355 Posts
| ||
|
TC_Beynbio
Norway81 Posts
stalkers and immorts get killed by warhounds and zealots are being mowed away by those hellions. I'm just thinking that 'hmmm if the warhound doesn't have AA would it be a direct counter to it is voids? I'm not saying it's op but just that protoss might get problems dealing this composition. Well we just have to wait until beta comes and see! | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On August 15 2012 07:30 TC_Beynbio wrote: i'm a bit afraid when terran comes with this warhound/battle hellion composition against protoss and there is nearly nothing that can kill it? stalkers and immorts get killed by warhounds and zealots are being mowed away by those hellions. I'm just thinking that 'hmmm if the warhound doesn't have AA would it be a direct counter to it is voids? I'm not saying it's op but just that protoss might get problems dealing this composition. Well we just have to wait until beta comes and see! If you choose stargate, it seems they want you to be able to use tempests. I think at first it will be hard to figure out how to use the tempests to deal with them though, since they do so low DPS. Of course they can get vikings against that, but then you can tech to HT to storm them and/or use blink stalkers to help out. With the long range of the tempest, it will be useful for preventing vikings from poking in too easily and poking out. If they engage, they can get stormed, then they have to run while being hit by the tempests 1-2 more times. Same with when they want to engage. This will cause some space for blink stalkers to attack the vikings too. Also you could use void rays. Again, this forces vikings. Ultimately though, this would force tanks to be added, to help deal with the stalkers by giving his vikings cover from the stalkers. With robo tech, you can use zealots, sentries for FF (unless they can easily target haywire at you?), colossi to deal splash. With templar tech, you can use HT archon zealot sentry. Storm for aoe to deal with hellions so your zealots don't get all sniped before the battle, and storm for during the battle. But yes, hellion warhound does seem to strong, especially considering you don't even need tanks with that (it's a mobile mech composition!!!) Hopefully you can still have different styles of mech as there are with bio... aggressive and defensive. But I think hellion/warhound may be too good. This is another reason why I feel the warhound should be nerfed a bit and have the tank be buffed. | ||
|
mcleod
Canada350 Posts
mech in tvp wasn't that bad before if you took the bue flame helion dmg nerf and tank seige mode dmg nerf back it would prob be playable. those are slight changes that would totally change mech tvp. seems like by adding battle helions, spider mines, and the warhound they are really over compensating. i dont really see how the warhound fits in the game. instead of taking small steps to fix something they see as broken, they are taking a bunch of huge uncessary steps. | ||
|
ownyah
146 Posts
| ||
|
SrJoSeZ
Peru121 Posts
On August 15 2012 06:04 BronzeKnee wrote: ....they decided to introduce the Warhound too, to "break tank lines." Because apparently having lines of tanks in strategic positions is less fun that A-moving two balls together | ||
|
casualman
United States1198 Posts
Blizzard is approaching this whole "Micro-intensiveness" problem of terran from the completely wrong angle. Giving all 3 races a-move possibilities utterly kills the game from the competitive standpoint. Who would want to see two pros a-move their armies into one another? Sure, they're going to be slightly bigger than your armies due to superior macro, but when there's no micro to be found it becomes utterly uninteresting. Imagine if every non-mirror matchup in HotS was PvZ. That's what this expansion is shaping up to be. | ||
|
Harbinger631
United States376 Posts
| ||
|
Psychobabas
2531 Posts
| ||
|
iamcaustic
Canada1509 Posts
On August 15 2012 06:50 Stratos_speAr wrote: Because then maybe the Blizzard developers will actually learn. We're at the point where we can't hope for unexpected success anymore. Blizzard has made a long string of terrible design decisions (between both WoL and D3) and they need a fucking wake-up call or this game is going to be dead. Learn what? The only reason they'd need to learn something is if it's a failure. Otherwise, it's a success and there is nothing to learn; only things to keep improving. To explain in more detail: to want Blizzard to learn something in the context you're using, it'd first require a failure. HotS is not yet released, which means the verdict on whether or not it'll be a failure is still out. In this case, you're hoping for a failure to force Blizzard to learn something in order to avoid future failure. It's cyclic logic and destructive for both parties for you to think in this way. More than that, though, it just doesn't make sense to want Blizzard to fail, unless you're some weird hater that really doesn't like them or has some personal vendetta or something. Being critical to help avoid failure in the first place is one thing. Actively desiring that failure to occur is completely opposite. If you're actually worried about the game dying, seeing it fail is probably the last thing you should be hoping for. On August 15 2012 07:54 Psychobabas wrote: the warhound is absolutely awful in TvT when both players go mech, in the sense that it's basically a warhound vs warhound game. They got to change that somehow. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't people noted that marauders beat warhounds? If that's the case, then we'd have warhounds > siege lines > marauders > warhounds, no? In other words, warhound wouldn't be at the top of the food chain like roaches are in ZvZ. I'm also not sure how you're using declaratives like "is" when the game isn't even in beta yet. | ||
|
scaban84
United States1080 Posts
| ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On August 15 2012 09:16 scaban84 wrote: I don't understand the complaints about the battle hellion/ warhound comp or the warhound being OP. The Toss dealt with it pretty cost efficiently with the Tempests. He just threw the game away when he moved into the beefier Terran army. If you have air control you have to use that advantage and not throw away units. Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit. | ||
|
durecell
United Kingdom85 Posts
| ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
To elaborate: Although the warhound appears to be an A-move unit(Especially with it's auto cast ability), it's ability to kite unstimmed marines(and presumably zealots while threatening stalkers, my opinion that the looks of the unit are nearly irrelevant, and the lack of empirical testing(the only kind we really have in Sc2) make it so the warhound is fine. On August 15 2012 09:31 Infernal_dream wrote: Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit. You remind of political ads on in america right now. With micro, tempests will be able to outlast a stalker in battle by quite a bit and be able to pressure positions, something stalkers do not have. They have potential, they are not "shit unit" because at +3 they do less dps than a +0 stalker. Although that statement sounds good enough to say the tempest is worthless, it really doesn't take into account the utility it brings(which is funny because if you talk about the stalkers DPS in comparison to other things it seems like a shit unit too, but the metagame proved us wrong). | ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
| ||
|
Harbinger631
United States376 Posts
On August 15 2012 09:31 Infernal_dream wrote: Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit. Way to exagerate. With 2 Tempest, you'll be killing a siege tank every 15 seconds, which with either force a retreat, or an attack. It's a perfect unit for pushing/forcing an engagement on your terms, and will be a great harassment unit as well. | ||
|
BuddhaMonk
781 Posts
However from an aesthetic point of view both the battle hellion and the warhound seem like very boring units. | ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
| ||
|
PMACProspekt
5 Posts
On August 15 2012 01:50 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Current Terran units already require lots of micro to maximize effectiveness, what's wrong with having a couple a-click units in the mix? You really want to make Terran players micro even more than they already have to? Because at a pro level, players are already able to micro units without sacrificing macro. Therefore, this would make for a higher skill ceiling for the whole game. | ||
| ||
