|
United States7483 Posts
On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all...
Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground.
|
On August 15 2012 01:50 KrazyTrumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 01:48 Thaniri wrote:
Dakim literally said that the warhound and hellion are being designed to be a-move units in the anaheim interview.
They just don't realize how stupid that is. 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?
Yes. Making a unit more mechanically taxing allows for Pros to further delineate their skill. Which is awesome.
|
On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground.
I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with.
Hellions?
Reapers?
|
They just don't realize how stupid that is.
David Kim is ruining Starcraft. It's hard enough just with Browder, his ideas for influencing 'balance' through unit design are horrible.
Pretty much. Browder/Kim seem to be so focused on bringing their own subpar ideas and concepts to SC2. I really wish they would just man up and face the fact that trying to differentiate SC2 from BW so much is generally bad for the game.
But w/e, Blizzards new direction seems to be making mediocre games and compensating with tons of hype. They seem to have taken cues from the rest of the world. Making people think your product is worthwhile is actually easier than making a worthwhile product.
|
Northern Ireland23701 Posts
On August 16 2012 01:18 Gben592 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 00:09 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 16 2012 00:02 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 23:53 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 15 2012 23:44 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 23:35 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 15 2012 23:27 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 22:51 wcr.4fun wrote:On August 15 2012 22:29 JonIrenicus wrote:
Warhound is an a-move unit.
So for me it is well designed, because protoss and zerg have so many a-move units.
What you should ask is a reworking of the protoss\zerg units to not be so a-movish, not to cut that possibility to terran army...
As terran, should we obliged to micro? I want to turtle such as you and to prepare my deathball to make you realise what a terran feels when he gets a-stomped. I agree, let's destroy this game even more by ruining the only interesting race in this game (terran). I've been reading your posts in a past few weeks, and I am quit worried for you... They are not destroying the Terran race, they are just making mech viable, even if you can argue that it isn't mech play, lets just forget about that, it will be viable. That means that Terran players will have choice. If you think that ONE unit will destroy the race completely, then I really can't help you. They are not making mech viable, battlehellions alone look like they'd augment that composition to make it viable. They're giving Terran a retarded, easy to use catch-all unit to appease scrubs, that is all. 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. 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! You (or someone) should make a thread on ideas for improving/replacing the warhound, maybe even an ideas for HOTS (maybe that would be too huge). You'd need a template to post with eg + Show Spoiler +Problem with warhound
Too "A move"
Not enough potential for better players to use it better
Boring
Not "mech" play
Only vs T and vs P . very little use against zerg
etc
How to solve issue
have the haywire not autocast
Give it a minimum range
Make it hit bio too
etc
Why this would solve/improve upon the warhound
Higher skillcap - more micro intensive
Minimum range could introduce cool positioning in the deathball/ lots of kiting stuff
I would actually make this thread right now, but i can't because i made this account today (I had to vent my feelings on the warhound)
Yeah sounds a pretty good idea, I was largely ranting about bigger design issues such as warpgates and other stuff like that, but could be useful. Can you not make new threads on here if you're a new poster?
|
My idea is to power up the haywire missiles so it fires 4 missiles into an area doing 25 damage each. It can hit 1 to 4 targets always doing 100 damage total. Maybe make it so it only locks onto mechanical.
Make this a castable ability with a fairly large cool down.
Nerf the stats of the warhound across the board. Less damage, less speed, less hp and 3 supply.
This will make the warhound more effective against robo units like immortal but less effective vs units like stalkers.
On August 16 2012 03:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground. I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with. Hellions? Reapers?
Hydras
|
United States7483 Posts
On August 16 2012 03:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground. I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with. Hellions? Reapers?
Can you think of many units in BW on the ground that goliaths traded cost-efficiently with?
And yeah, vikings do very well vs. hellions, reapers, do pretty well vs. marines before stim and medivacs, do pretty hilariously well vs. hydralisks (although nobody makes them in the matchup), and they get used for harass (see every TvT Gumiho plays).
They're like super mobile goliaths.
|
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds
|
On August 16 2012 03:59 AGIANTSMURF wrote:
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds
That's why this post is stupid. We should just bash people like you to man up and micro 
|
On August 16 2012 03:59 AGIANTSMURF wrote:
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds
It's not really that Terran has to micro so much, but more the fact that Zerg and Protoss don't need to micro. Adding 1A units to Terran doesn't solve that.
|
On August 16 2012 03:49 AzureD wrote:My idea is to power up the haywire missiles so it fires 4 missiles into an area doing 25 damage each. It can hit 1 to 4 targets always doing 100 damage total. Maybe make it so it only locks onto mechanical. Make this a castable ability with a fairly large cool down. Nerf the stats of the warhound across the board. Less damage, less speed, less hp and 3 supply. This will make the warhound more effective against robo units like immortal but less effective vs units like stalkers. Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground. I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with. Hellions? Reapers? Hydras
I like the thought of the ability, especially if it offers some time to avoid it, the Warhound doesn't have to require micro in and of itself, if it brings more micro into the game.
|
On August 15 2012 01:47 Kamwah wrote:
It's an A-move unit, they're giving Terrans a way to be like the other two races.
But that is a bad idea. Protoss is terrible to spectate.
To the OP: Warhound looks awful. I hope it get removed together with Marauder. Will it? Probably not. Blizzard did not hit many clear notes in their design decisions in WoL. Which units are actually well designed? Banelings, Queens, and, perhaps Infestor? That is about it.
|
On August 16 2012 03:55 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground. I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with. Hellions? Reapers? Can you think of many units in BW on the ground that goliaths traded cost-efficiently with? And yeah, vikings do very well vs. hellions, reapers, do pretty well vs. marines before stim and medivacs, do pretty hilariously well vs. hydralisks (although nobody makes them in the matchup), and they get used for harass (see every TvT Gumiho plays). They're like super mobile goliaths.
Goliaths did well vs. Marines, Firebats, unsieged Siege Tanks, Vultures, Zealots, Dragoons (situationally), Dark Templar, Zerglings, Hydralisks, Wraiths, Battlecruisers, Scouts, Carriers, Mutalisks, and Guardians (all with the range upgrade).
The Viking's place in the tech tree means that you will almost never get it out before Marines have Stim/Combat Shield. I've also never actually seen Vikings trade well against Hydralisks due to the Hydralisk's ridiculous DPS, I'll have to test that. They're also sub-par for harass due to their high cost, the fact that they take away from Medivac production, and the fact that you need to keep them for AA and so losing them is a big setback.
|
I don't really care how the unit works at the moment, it'll be changed and tweaked as time goes on.
All I got to say is DAMN does it look like shit though.
|
On August 16 2012 03:59 AGIANTSMURF wrote:
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds
i'd say most of the complainers dont actually play terran............ Battlenet at-least in Europe and NA ( which is most of the posters on team liquid) are mostly protoss/zerg users. And i'd say 70% of the forum does not actually even play game, but loves to be part of any band wagon. I welcome the a-move warhound, a lot of the arguments made here are actually quite nonsensical. Its not like the Goliath was any less a-movey in broodwar compared to this current proposed warhound yet they want the return of the Goliath instead. But hey, this is the starcraft 2 community. We like to complain about everything.
As far as im concerned, i believe the warhound has even more micro potential than the goliath. Its able to walk fast, thus you can probably kite with it. The haywire missile ability autocast can be turned off, which might actually be good for certain situations, For instance would'nt it be way better to cast mass haywire manually on immortals and colosus so they dont waste it on stalkers?
Anyway.. Lawl at the thread.
|
On August 16 2012 03:49 AzureD wrote:My idea is to power up the haywire missiles so it fires 4 missiles into an area doing 25 damage each. It can hit 1 to 4 targets always doing 100 damage total. Maybe make it so it only locks onto mechanical. Make this a castable ability with a fairly large cool down. Nerf the stats of the warhound across the board. Less damage, less speed, less hp and 3 supply. This will make the warhound more effective against robo units like immortal but less effective vs units like stalkers. Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:37 Stratos_speAr wrote:On August 16 2012 03:29 Whitewing wrote:On August 16 2012 01:00 baba1 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:50 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote:On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: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. 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... Whaaaaat? Are you sure you play Starcraft 2 ? How the hell do you compare Goliath to Vikings?? LOL! Vikings never needed that ground mode anyway, it's retarded and useless. Get rid of it. Bring back the GOLIATH because the warhound is god AWFUL! Replacing an awesome unit by a boring and ugly robot won't help at all... Viking ground mode gets a lot of use in TvT, and gets used in PvT after colossi die. Vikings are actually pretty decent on the ground. I'm hard-pressed to think of a unit that ground Vikings trade cost-efficiently with. Hellions? Reapers? Hydras
And Stalkers.
For those who think you can't micro Goliaths... you haven't seen BoxeR play much, have you?
|
On August 16 2012 03:42 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 01:18 Gben592 wrote:On August 16 2012 00:09 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 16 2012 00:02 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 23:53 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 15 2012 23:44 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 23:35 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 15 2012 23:27 Ramiz1989 wrote:On August 15 2012 22:51 wcr.4fun wrote:On August 15 2012 22:29 JonIrenicus wrote:
Warhound is an a-move unit.
So for me it is well designed, because protoss and zerg have so many a-move units.
What you should ask is a reworking of the protoss\zerg units to not be so a-movish, not to cut that possibility to terran army...
As terran, should we obliged to micro? I want to turtle such as you and to prepare my deathball to make you realise what a terran feels when he gets a-stomped. I agree, let's destroy this game even more by ruining the only interesting race in this game (terran). I've been reading your posts in a past few weeks, and I am quit worried for you... They are not destroying the Terran race, they are just making mech viable, even if you can argue that it isn't mech play, lets just forget about that, it will be viable. That means that Terran players will have choice. If you think that ONE unit will destroy the race completely, then I really can't help you. They are not making mech viable, battlehellions alone look like they'd augment that composition to make it viable. They're giving Terran a retarded, easy to use catch-all unit to appease scrubs, that is all. 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. 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! You (or someone) should make a thread on ideas for improving/replacing the warhound, maybe even an ideas for HOTS (maybe that would be too huge). You'd need a template to post with eg + Show Spoiler +Problem with warhound
Too "A move"
Not enough potential for better players to use it better
Boring
Not "mech" play
Only vs T and vs P . very little use against zerg
etc
How to solve issue
have the haywire not autocast
Give it a minimum range
Make it hit bio too
etc
Why this would solve/improve upon the warhound
Higher skillcap - more micro intensive
Minimum range could introduce cool positioning in the deathball/ lots of kiting stuff
I would actually make this thread right now, but i can't because i made this account today (I had to vent my feelings on the warhound) Yeah sounds a pretty good idea, I was largely ranting about bigger design issues such as warpgates and other stuff like that, but could be useful. Can you not make new threads on here if you're a new poster?
Not for three days ^^ :/ Otherwise it would be done! :D
|
On August 16 2012 04:44 HowardRoark wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 01:47 Kamwah wrote:
It's an A-move unit, they're giving Terrans a way to be like the other two races. But that is a bad idea. Protoss is terrible to spectate. To the OP: Warhound looks awful. I hope it get removed together with Marauder. Will it? Probably not. Blizzard did not hit many clear notes in their design decisions in WoL. Which units are actually well designed? Banelings, Queens, and, perhaps Infestor? That is about it.
Queens and infestors well designed? Sure, if by well designed you mean the own everything relative to cost. Infestors in particular, they can deal with bio, mech, mutas, the whole toss army, etc.
|
On August 16 2012 04:52 johnny123 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:59 AGIANTSMURF wrote:
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds I welcome the a-move warhound, a lot of the arguments made here are actually quite nonsensical. Its not like the Goliath was any less a-movey in broodwar compared to this current proposed warhound yet they want the return of the Goliath instead. But hey, this is the starcraft 2 community. We like to complain about everything. As far as im concerned, i believe the warhound has even more micro potential than the goliath. Its able to walk fast, thus you can probably kite with it. The haywire missile ability autocast can be turned off, which might actually be good for certain situations, For instance would'nt it be way better to cast mass haywire manually on immortals and colosus so they dont waste it on stalkers? Anyway.. Lawl at the thread.
This is Blizzards "E-sports" game. The first rule if your going to have a competitive game is that there has to be (many) ways to differentiate pro players from good players, and good players from bad players etc (this is also makes it much more interesting to watch - part of the reason we watch is to watch absolutely sick play). There has to be a high skillcap and lots of things that you can basically continue getting better at. "a move units" have very little potential for a player to become more skillfull at using them, making them boring to watch (IMO), boring to use and not good from a competetive point of view.
It would be way cooler if there was no autocast - you had to click a button instead - and there was like a minimum range. Then you could have cool micro going on, with the terran player kiting the Toss's forces, keeping them at the optimum range, firing the missiles, and still continuing macroing at the same time (multitasking!). But i still think the unit is broken because it isn't mech... its just a bigger marauder... but w/e
Now before you argue the usual "But toss and zerg are all A move... why can't we have A move too". You don't fix a problem by making everything have the same problem. As a zerg i would LOVE to have more microable stuff going on.
|
On August 16 2012 04:52 johnny123 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 03:59 AGIANTSMURF wrote:
I like how terrans complain how they have to always micro their army, blizzard gives them some a click units and now they're complaining that there's no room for micro...
well thats why you get the choice between bio and warhounds i'd say most of the complainers dont actually play terran............ Battlenet at-least in Europe and NA ( which is most of the posters on team liquid) are mostly protoss/zerg users. And i'd say 70% of the forum does not actually even play game, but loves to be part of any band wagon. I welcome the a-move warhound, a lot of the arguments made here are actually quite nonsensical. Its not like the Goliath was any less a-movey in broodwar compared to this current proposed warhound yet they want the return of the Goliath instead. But hey, this is the starcraft 2 community. We like to complain about everything. As far as im concerned, i believe the warhound has even more micro potential than the goliath. Its able to walk fast, thus you can probably kite with it. The haywire missile ability autocast can be turned off, which might actually be good for certain situations, For instance would'nt it be way better to cast mass haywire manually on immortals and colosus so they dont waste it on stalkers? Anyway.. Lawl at the thread.
the problem with the Warhound is because it going to overshadow the tank because they over lap roles to much. Which will lead player to just mass them instead of tanks. In BW, you can not mass golliath efficiently and they were just always support. Which is why you dont see stupid golliath vs golliath in TvT because they were support and tank were the heart of the mech army.
From watching the battle report, just tell me which unit looked more like the core unit in that mech army? To me, it looked like the Warhound was the core unit and the tank were just support. This will lead people to make less tank and make more warhound and you will eventually see mass warhound and therefore you will see less micro and a-move. I honestly didnt see a reason to make tanks and when the terran player in the battle report stop making them and mass warhound instead, he won easily.
This is the differences between the golliath and the warhound. Sure they require teh same amount of micro pretty much but the game they will lead to is completely different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
