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.
The problem is that if you add effective 1-a strategies to Terran, you're just lowering the skill ceiling required to do well, and that isn't a good thing.
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.
The problem is that if you add effective 1-a strategies to Terran, you're just lowering the skill ceiling required to do well, and that isn't a good thing.
Not for Koreans, but it's a Godsend for foreigners. Overall, the warhound seems like a little bit of a ridiculous siegebreaker. It probably has too much health ATM, or maybe it's the range, but it's pretty derpy, I have to admit.
On August 16 2012 05:51 dUTtrOACh wrote: Not for Koreans, but it's a Godsend for foreigners. Overall, the warhound seems like a little bit of a ridiculous siegebreaker. It probably has too much health ATM, or maybe it's the range, but it's pretty derpy, I have to admit.
I don't know why everyone rags on the Warhound so much. ALL the new units for each race are new "easy siegebreaker" type units.
Warhound: A-move and wipe siege line Swarm Host: Burrow, then a-move Locusts and wipe siege line Tempest: Get sight, then A-move and wipe siege line
On August 16 2012 05:51 dUTtrOACh wrote: Not for Koreans, but it's a Godsend for foreigners. Overall, the warhound seems like a little bit of a ridiculous siegebreaker. It probably has too much health ATM, or maybe it's the range, but it's pretty derpy, I have to admit.
I don't know why everyone rags on the Warhound so much. ALL the new units for each race are new "easy siegebreaker" type units.
Warhound: A-move and wipe siege line Swarm Host: Burrow, then a-move Locusts and wipe siege line Tempest: get sight, then A-move and wipe siege line
Because the Swarm Host isn't nearly as good as the other two at breaking Siege lines, and you almost never see Tanks in TvP anyway. Also, it isn't a good thing to have so many siege-breakers; Browder and Co. are incredibly dense for thinking that we need to make tanks weaker/less effective.
On August 16 2012 05:58 Stratos_speAr wrote: Because the Swarm Host isn't nearly as good as the other two at breaking Siege lines, and you almost never see Tanks in TvP anyway. Also, it isn't a good thing to have so many siege-breakers; Browder and Co. are incredibly dense for thinking that we need to make tanks weaker/less effective.
HotS is basically the anti-tank update, meant to break previously "unbreakable" siege lines.
Zerg is getting awesome stuff like Viper abduct to reach where Locusts can't. Also Ultralisks and Hydras become viable with their new upgrades.
Protoss can safely fast expand now thanks to the Mship Core, meaning although Tempests are expensive, you'll have the money for them no matter what.
Terran has Firebats that cost 100 minerals, no gas, and can be reactored. Fire up those Psi Storms because Zealots aren't going to cut it when it comes to engaging that. Phoenixes will have a field day killing them though. (they're light units)
On August 16 2012 00:51 submarine wrote: 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.
This. I never understood this at all. Its like they are wanting to phase out the tank all together. I mean in WoL, we have so many units that counter a unit that like you said is not "dominant" in any matchup. Yet they are adding even MORE units that counter the tank.
If the tanks dealt "terrible terrible" damage, then they would have a case but its not like breaking siege lines are too hard yet they make it sound like its one of the biggest issues in SC2. We dont need more tools to break siege lines!! For the zerg, it is sort of understandable but for P and T, they've got enough things at their disposal to break through these lines.
Nor do we want mech "deathballs" in the form of warhounds becoming the "core" composition of the so called "mech" play due to its superior hp/cost/mobility.
Maybe its a good time for blizzard to start looking at the limitations of the current viking/thor dynamic in terms of AA and its role then go from there to create a new unit that either
a) Replaces the thor with a new unit that provides GtA option that is much more accessible and viable if not opting for vikings. b) Tweaks the current units so that you have two viable options for AA in the form of GtA and AtA. c) Tweaks the current units and adds in X unit that creates two viable options for AA in the form of GtA and AtA.
i kinda like how the new units for terran are a little bit more a move. Whether or not this is good for the game or if it should be this way is open to discussion obviously, but personally I cant wait to have an easier time winning. I will say that the whole autocast thing seems a little odd. Why not make it a castable spell? Or maybe one of those things that you can right click to make it autocastable (like carriers building interceptors). Maybe when the beta comes out we will see why this is but right now it just seems weird
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 said ground units, do you really need me to list all the air units vikings do well against? It'll be that large too.
Yeah vikings cost more than goliaths did, but it's a different game and income rates are different, and more importantly, vikings have a HUGE mobility advantage over goliaths. Vikings are commonly used as harass in TvT because you have to build them anyway, so you might as well use them for that after you've taken air control.
what i don't understand is that their reason for bringing the warhound in in the first place was because thors were to clunky and they felt terran needed a better answer to mutalisks when going mech... but then they remove the aa attack of the warhound and keep them in the game... i get that they brought in the mine to give them a mech aa unit, but why did they keep the warhound in then... i think they should scrap the warhound and come up with something different out of the factory. or maybe even just adjust the thor, the warhound just feels like a big maurader... and the mech play just doesn't seem like it will be mech play, but more like bio tank...
I REALLY think they need to scrap the never used cannon strike ability and change it to something that is usefull. something that will make mech viable, maybe give thors an anti mechanincal shot, or give them an aoe anti mechanincal upgrade or something i don't know
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.
LOL , where terrans is most A move rase in the game. Mech is almost fully A move , you just need to focus BL , when you seen them , vs ground is pure A move . Bio the same , you need only split vs banes , watch out for storms and focus collous , rest is A move. Terran dont even ned to have good position in fight , only use stim , at master lv play.
Oher races ned better army control then terran , zerg need surround enemy.. have lings on front , banes on other control group and watch out to make good hit by them , make good position with roches etc etc , terran dont have this problem , because you only got ranged units..
Toss needs the same , zelots on from , stalkers in good position , use blink focus medivacs etc etc .. So you are wrong terran in A move rase , not zerg or toss.
Yeah, mech needs a good anti-air unit MUCH more than it needs an easier Marauder that pops out of the Factory.
I don't understand why the Blizzard team thinks that late game TvT siege lines are a problem. TvT has always been the best mirror matchup because Tanks give such a strong defender's advantage.
What they should do is buff Nukes from 11 range to 13 range so it will be possible for bio armies to dislodge siege lines without their own siege tanks. That would compensate for mech getting Battle Hellions and Widow Mines. Nukes are not used very often in any matchup right now, so buffing Nukes would improve TvT without effecting TvZ and TvP very much.
On August 16 2012 08:36 gulden wrote: replace the warhound with the goliath and get rid of the widowMine and most problems should be solved
Umm, the goliath is already in brood war, so we can't have it. Have you forgotten how this game works?
The Marine was in Brood War, as were the Zealot and the Zergling. The Warhound basically is a Goliath anyway, and Blizzard has steadily been trying to differentiate it more and more with little success.
I'm not sure where people are getting the A-click idea from. They're almost as fast as stalkers and have really long range.
You actually need to kite against marines, roaches, zealots... and damn is the current iteration of the Warhound good when it's kiting those. Plus, the game will probably eventually be balanced in a way that encourages people to manually fire the missiles.
That said, while they are microable, they don't insta-splode like Marines, which is good design for Terran. The entire army shouldn't be exploding after one or two mistakes. I think they are sufficiently easy to use while still being microable.
Oh, and I really liked the Goliath model from the campaign (used in the HotS custom) a lot more than the real Warhound model. I think they should just do a variation off that. I mean, the Goliath and Warhound are both basically Mechwarriors, why not just a Goliath with visibly different weapon loadouts? You can still call it the Warhound, of course.
On August 16 2012 09:11 LavaLava wrote: I'm not sure where people are getting the A-click idea from. They're almost as fast as stalkers and have really long range.
You actually need to kite against marines, roaches, zealots... and damn is the current iteration of the Warhound good when it's kiting those. Plus, the game will probably eventually be balanced in a way that encourages people to manually fire the missiles.
That said, while they are microable, they don't insta-splode like Marines, which is good design for Terran. The entire army shouldn't be exploding after one or two mistakes. I think they are sufficiently easy to use while still being microable.
Oh, and I really liked the Goliath model from the campaign (used in the HotS custom) a lot more than the real Warhound model. I think they should just do a variation off that. I mean, the Goliath and Warhound are both basically Mechwarriors, why not just a Goliath with visibly different weapon loadouts? You can still call it the Warhound, of course.
You say that you don't understand why it's called a-move, and then explain why it's a-move. The reason Stalkers kite is because they lose against pretty much everything in a straight fight because they have abysmal DPS. The Warhound doesn't, and also has a lot of health + more range. Doesn't look like they require much micro at all since they're fast, durable, do crazy damage, and have more range than most ground units.
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.
lol have you ever even played BW? Goliaths were actually pretty terrible vs most ground units - in fact they had literally the exact same stats as a viking vs ground units (12 dmg, 125 hp) albeit at a lower cost. The only ground units they beat convincingly were vultures, zerglings, marines, and firebats, and you'd never even see the last 2 in a normal TvT. They were mediocre vs zealots and were just plain bad vs tanks, hydras, and dragoons due to explosive damage. People really only got them for antiair.
Why does the Thor still exist? Combine Warhound and Thor to make weakish GtG, but has those (toggle) autocast rockets hitting air. We'll call it the Thorhound. It's different enough from Goliath to save face for Blizz and Seige Tanks would still be the main GtG so the APM requirements are still lowish, but Terran still has to think.
EPT
