EPT[/QUOTE]
[D] Warhound: Is it good or should it be changed? - Page 18
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
[/QUOTE] | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
Ah I hope it works out tho. *fingers crossed* | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On August 15 2012 23:44 Ramiz1989 wrote: Yes, I am pretty sure that you know how it will turn out in the end, especially that is alpha build. After all, they can scrap the Warhound, and they can buff the Siege Tank, they are still trying to make mech viable. But hey, everyone on these forums know the best, and understand the game perfectly, even without touching it, so why bother actually arguing? We should just whine and flame Blizzard for not doing how we want, and 95% of people here is doing excellent job with that. I guess all these people knew how WoL would turn out too, since it was the same in the first few months as it was in the last 6 months, right? I'm fed up with people making salient points that get ignored, only to have people coming in and spouting the same incorrect statements after not reading the rest of the thread, every thread. It's not how it's balanced, it's its intended role, how it functions that people don't like. It's also not conducive to how mech is played, in its current form. The only thing you're right about is that the game is in Alpha and thus subject to change. Expressing our opinions on this garbage unit, may actually make Blizzard see sense and yes it may change. If the community leaves them to their own devices and go 'oh well, wait and see', well we'll get a game worse than it could have been. And yes, those whining in Beta about certain things actually turned out to be correct on a lot of their calls. Sorry for wanting the game to be as good as it can be by discussing this issue. | ||
|
Zach_Attack
United States13 Posts
| ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On August 15 2012 23:53 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm fed up with people making salient points that get ignored, only to have people coming in and spouting the same incorrect statements after not reading the rest of the thread, every thread. It's not how it's balanced, it's its intended role, how it functions that people don't like. It's also not conducive to how mech is played, in its current form. The only thing you're right about is that the game is in Alpha and thus subject to change. Expressing our opinions on this garbage unit, may actually make Blizzard see sense and yes it may change. If the community leaves them to their own devices and go 'oh well, wait and see', well we'll get a game worse than it could have been. And yes, those whining in Beta about certain things actually turned out to be correct on a lot of their calls. Sorry for wanting the game to be as good as it can be by discussing this issue. There is nothing bad with wanting game to be good. The fact is, majority of people state the problem that they see(and it can be a problem, but doesn't necessarily mean it will be), but don't give the solution, it is like to whine for the sake of whining. Post can be constructive, explaining the problem, and giving the answer, but you can't expect for Blizzard to take you seriously if you just keep whine about balance, and flame them.(Not you, but community in general). | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:02 Ramiz1989 wrote: There is nothing bad with wanting game to be good. The fact is, majority of people state the problem that they see(and it can be a problem, but doesn't necessarily mean it will be), but don't give the solution, it is like to whine for the sake of whining. Post can be constructive, explaining the problem, and giving the answer, but you can't expect for Blizzard to take you seriously if you just keep whine about balance, and flame them.(Not you, but community in general). I posted like, a 1300 word post on this somewhere else, with a good few suggestions. I don't know I just feel a lot of good constructive posts get buried amongst 'I like it' 'I dislike it' posts that don't expand upon anything and are just made to boost people's post counts. Thus a thread that contains a lot of good debate gains the appearance of a back-and-forth whinefest. These threads have seen some pretty good critiquing, and even alternative ideas. At the very least it's pretty clear that the unit is very, very unpopular here. That said perhaps the Bnet forums are showing a positive response for all I know. Blizzard are paid to design the game, I mean it's their job to come up with the solutions. While considering community suggestions can open the floodgates, and make it difficult to get anything done, there's some good ideas on TL especially if they cared to look around (which they claim to). Sorry btw for beligerent postage earlier man, frigging exam stress, plus I'm still unable to play the game since the carcrash that was patch 1.5, bit on edge! | ||
|
baba1
Canada355 Posts
Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!! | ||
|
Bjoernzor
Sweden159 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!! And remove the Thor | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
It makes me sad that they refuse to remove the Thor. But, that's what you get when you put a CE skin on a crappy unit. If they really want to keep the art. They should make them smaller and call them Lokis. And give it a generic short range AA(6 Range). Then give it the ability to implant itself into the ground and take out its AA Cannons which have a more range and splash. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:09 Wombat_NI wrote: I posted like, a 1300 word post on this somewhere else, with a good few suggestions. I don't know I just feel a lot of good constructive posts get buried amongst 'I like it' 'I dislike it' posts that don't expand upon anything and are just made to boost people's post counts. Thus a thread that contains a lot of good debate gains the appearance of a back-and-forth whinefest. These threads have seen some pretty good critiquing, and even alternative ideas. At the very least it's pretty clear that the unit is very, very unpopular here. That said perhaps the Bnet forums are showing a positive response for all I know. Blizzard are paid to design the game, I mean it's their job to come up with the solutions. While considering community suggestions can open the floodgates, and make it difficult to get anything done, there's some good ideas on TL especially if they cared to look around (which they claim to). Sorry btw for beligerent postage earlier man, frigging exam stress, plus I'm still unable to play the game since the carcrash that was patch 1.5, bit on edge! I know, but that is what I've said, there are like 5% of those good posts, that give Blizzard suggestion on what to change. I saw your post earlier, just wasn't able to read it because I was at work. And majority of posts look like this: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!! Even though they have said that they don't want to add any old units back, people still ask for them. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:23 GinDo wrote: It makes me sad that they refuse to remove the Thor. But, that's what you get when you put a CE skin on a crappy unit. If they really want to keep the art. They should make them smaller and call them Lokis. And give it a generic short range AA(6 Range). Then give it the ability to implant itself into the ground and take out its AA Cannons which have a little more range and splash. An STA Siege-tank? I don't think that'll go over very well with the community. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:25 SarcasmMonster wrote: An STA Siege-tank? I don't think that'll go over very well with the community. It was worth a shot. I really don't like what they have now. And even though my idea isn't perfect. It's better then what ever crap is coming out of Blizzard. | ||
|
Mr Showtime
United States1353 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:23 GinDo wrote: It makes me sad that they refuse to remove the Thor. But, that's what you get when you put a CE skin on a crappy unit. If they really want to keep the art. They should make them smaller and call them Lokis. And give it a generic short range AA(6 Range). Then give it the ability to implant itself into the ground and take out its AA Cannons which have a more range and splash. I wouldn't say that they refuse to remove it. The first public build of HotS had the Thor gone with the AA Warhound replacing it. I REALLY want them to bring it back. It was much better as a Goliath-esque unit. They can keep the model if they would like (even if it looks stupid as fuck), but it should act as a goliath. | ||
|
Zach_Attack
United States13 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: I know, but that is what I've said, there are like 5% of those good posts, that give Blizzard suggestion on what to change. I saw your post earlier, just wasn't able to read it because I was at work. And majority of posts look like this: Even though they have said that they don't want to add any old units back, people still ask for them. In one preview Blizzard said they were going to make the warhound essentially the goliath. It was going to have AA, ground attack and they were going to ditch the thor. It seems pretty reasonable to ask for the old version of the warhound aka the goliath especially because if seems to fulfill both the warhound's and the thor's roles better. If they want to keep the thor they need to make the warhound's ground combat ability in line with the golaiths. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: I know, but that is what I've said, there are like 5% of those good posts, that give Blizzard suggestion on what to change. I saw your post earlier, just wasn't able to read it because I was at work. And majority of posts look like this: Even though they have said that they don't want to add any old units back, people still ask for them. 'Here's what I want, with no reasoning or justification for my desire.' Exactly what I'm whining about, god. You can have opinions I disagree with, or whatever but the point of forums is debate, give us a bit to work with guys! | ||
|
baba1
Canada355 Posts
Actually yeah! Why not combine both thor and warhound to form the new multi-usage all around robot that is the goliath! How did terran engineers downgraded their technology from sc1 is beyond me. | ||
|
GohgamX
Canada1096 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:31 Mr Showtime wrote: I wouldn't say that they refuse to remove it. The first public build of HotS had the Thor gone with the AA Warhound replacing it. I REALLY want them to bring it back. It was much better as a Goliath-esque unit. They can keep the model if they would like (even if it looks stupid as fuck), but it should act as a goliath. I would like to see the traditional goliath come back - not a big fan of the warhound... It would make mech a solid option and give it that sexy BW feel  | ||
|
Louis8k8
Canada285 Posts
I think the battle hellion + siege tank + thor is already good enough for mech play. No need for this unit. Maybe give thor a siege-mode that makes them into a heavy anti-air structure. (valkyrie-like attacks) | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote: In one preview Blizzard said they were going to make the warhound essentially the goliath. It was going to have AA, ground attack and they were going to ditch the thor. It seems pretty reasonable to ask for the old version of the warhound aka the goliath especially because if seems to fulfill both the warhound's and the thor's roles better. If they want to keep the thor they need to make the warhound's ground combat ability in line with the golaiths. But that is the point, it isn't Goliath, it maybe feels a bit like Goliath, but it will be just a smaller Thor, with really strong GtG attack and AoE GtA attack. You can ask for that, but asking for Goliath is retarded, especially because we already have the Goliath, and it is called Viking, it is almost the same as Goliath, expect that he has to be in Air mode to have Air Attack. Goliath doesn't even have the same role as a Thor, Goliath have long range GtA attack that is great vs. large units(in other words, armored in SC2), and pretty weak GtG attack vs. Large units, but better for smaller units. Thor has AoE GtA attack that is great vs. small(light) units, has huge burst potential for GtG, which is good vs. large(armored) units. That is why the "old" Warhound wasn't even close to the Goliath(except that it was more mobile than Thor), but it actually was the small Thor, it countered all units that Thor does, and served the same purpose. I want to see you fighting Mutas if we remove the Thor and replace it with Goliath that is pretty terrible vs. Mutas(make its air attack strong as Viking's). It just doesn't work that way, you have to look from every angle, and to understand what will that break and what will that make. To be honest, I also liked the old Warhound, but I don't necessarily mean that this one is awful, this one for me, has quite good concept and because of its speed, it can be microed, and you can kite with it. We will have to wait and see, but whining "BAAAAAH AWFUL! I WANT MY GOLIATH BACK!" won't help at all... | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
As if anyone would casts and focus fire the missiles for every single Warhound on another target. To the Warhound concept in general: TvP: I do not really understand why they would add such a unit. Mech needed a unit that can play the meatshield role against chargelots. Battle mode hellions in combination with thors should fill that role. On top of that tank damage is just rather bad against large or autospliting (charge) toss units. I do not understand why they would turn the unique mech style into something that plays more like biomech in other matchups. The Warhound has the typical characteristic of bio units(fast, lots of dps) just with more health and it comes out of the factory and shares factory upgrades. If they want to make such a play style possible it would have been easier to just buff the siege tank in one way or another(more single target damage, more damage against shields, hold fire command) to make it a valuable addition to normal bio-centric TvP. With a stronger siege tank pure mech should also be possible, especially with the new battle hellion as meatshield. I just do not really understand what role the warhound is actually supposed to fill. The warhound with its bonus damage against mechanical is especially strong against units like the stalker, the probe and the sentry and seems to be kind of ok against immortals and colossus with the haywires. It just seems to be a general purpose ground dps unit that is kind of fast. Well, the general purpose ground dps should already be covered by siegetanks and thors, and the fast part should be covered by hellions. If you want the combination i suggest building a few raxes. TvT: I heard some blizzard guy say that this unit should be able to break tank lines. Sorry, but i don't get it. If one player chooses to play bio or marine tank no one would ever build warhounds. Pure mech vs mech will maybe turn into some kind of strange mass warhound viking vs warhound viking into bio or bc switch, that is if the warhound really shits on tanks. This really sounds quite stupid. In general HOTS and tanks: I do not understand why blizzard adds so many units and abilities that that seem to be counters to siege tanks. They add Viper abduct, burrow charge,the Warhound, that capital long range toss ship and the swarm host. If i look at the current state of the game i can not understand why tanks need to be any worse. Tanks do not really dominate any matchup. Yes, TvT can be quite tank heavy, but adding a factory unit as counter seems to be quite stupid. | ||
| ||
